Estonia Political Briefing: the Autumn of the … Internal Politics E-MAP Foundation MTÜ
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ISSN: 2560-1601 Vol. 32, No. 1 (EE) September 2020 Estonia political briefing: The Autumn of the … internal politics E-MAP Foundation MTÜ 1052 Budapest Petőfi Sándor utca 11. +36 1 5858 690 Kiadó: Kína-KKE Intézet Nonprofit Kft. [email protected] Szerkesztésért felelős személy: CHen Xin Kiadásért felelős személy: Huang Ping china-cee.eu 2017/01 The Autumn of the … internal politics Is there a niche left for internal politics to engage a given society’s attention when you have so much going on internationally? The pandemic, Belarus, the upcoming presidential elections in the USA, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, trade disputes between China and the United States, a range of issues related to climate change, emerging cybersecurity challenges, and Karabakh… Quite enough for a solid decade, not just for a single year…For Estonia intra-political life, there is a chance to reflect on the actuality, while using process tracing method. The most recent sounding examples of such professional reflections were given by Toomas Hendrik Ilves (an interview and an article), the country’ former President (2006- 2016), Indrek Kiisler (an article), Head of Radionews Department at Estonian Public Broadcasting or ERR, and Raimond Kaljulaid (an article), a Riigikogu Member from Social Democratic Party. While answering the question on “Estonia’s condition today”, Ilves noted that the country has “come to a standstill”, finding some similarities between the current status quo in Estonia with what happened to the politics in the Republic of Ireland about 70 years ago (“the young men who had led [the country to its independence] got old and the country entered a period of stagnation”1). On a more specific note and without criticising anybody in particular, the former President underlined that “[a] good foreign minister worries about how to secure more flights to Tallinn, instead of priority[s]ing making sure that ‘Tallinn’ is written without spelling errors on the notice boards of the few airports that offer flights to Estonia”2. Most probably, the idea was to indirectly compare the tasks that were assigned to Ilves himself when he was the Estonian Minister of Foreign Affairs (1996-1998 and 1999-2002) – then Toomas Hendrik Ilves was among the country’s leading politicians to successfully advocate the Estonia’s case for both the EU and NATO memberships – with the scope of the current Foreign Minister’s activity. Unsurprisingly, what is on the docket for the Minister- incumbent now is incomparable to what it was for his processor in the second half of the 1990s. In his separate article, the former President who was then busy convincing many major powers like Germany and France that the Estonian prospective admission to the main geo-strategic 1 Toomas Hendrik Ilves in Aimar Altosaar, ‘Ilves: Estonia’s good reputation now dull’, Postimees, 17 August 2020. Available from [https://news.postimees.ee/7041121/ilves-estonia-s-good-reputation-now-dull]. 2 Ilves in Altosaar. 1 frameworks of the political West had plenty of value added, noted that “the idea of Estonia becoming a member of NATO or the EU was still utopian for most of Europe in the late 1990s, even though it was already a clear goal for us”3. At the same moment, back to the present time, Ilves is impressed by Estonia’s “innovative spirit” and “a truly positive global reputation”4, stating that [i]f there was one so-called Eastern European country that was known everywhere from Japan to Uruguay and known for good things, it was Estonia. Having a good reputation brings investments, opens doors for Estonians all over the world. From there, it is up to each and every one of us to decide whether to use that reputation to make it, attract necessary capital to grow and become international, go global, as our unicorns have. Therefore, reputation is the foundation and something that a lot of other, especially post-communist states still grapple with 30 years on. But what makes us strong is Estonians’ enterprising spirit and hard work.5 Is it what the country’s internal politics is trying to build on, in order succeed in the post- 2020 period? Is Estonian political system still ‘healthy’, considering the fact that the parliamentary opposition has been rather quiet (some would even argue – ineffective) since the Second Cabinet of Jüri Ratas was formed in April 2019? Indrek Kiisler, a top-journalist, offers his professional take on the issue. He argued that the political opposition in Estonia “could hardly get a word in during that period of fast-paced decisions” (it was not unique for “all democratic Western countries”), but, since the popularity of the Estonian Government “did not spike during the crisis” (this is where Estonia “seems to be a complete exception” from the rest of the aforementioned countries), the opposition has not managed to use this factor to its advantage6. Further on, Kiisler stated that, having observed the situation, the current governmental coalition detected that “voter attitudes are slow to change no matter what they do”, and this can generate a decent number of following questions: Has anyone heard anything specific in terms of the opposition’s plans for delivering the Estonian economy from the mire it finds itself in following the coronavirus crisis? What are the Reform Party's proposals? Could we be talking about a sharp tax cut, fundamental structural 3 Toomas Hendrik Ilves, ‘Drought of essayism’ in ERR, 6 September 2020. Available from [https://news.err.ee/1131813/toomas-hendrik-ilves-drought-of-essayism]. 4 Ilves in Altosaar. 5 Ilves in Altosaar. 6 Indrek Kiisler, ‘Time for the opposition to wake up’ in ERR, 16 September 2020. Available from [https://news.err.ee/1135640/indrek-kiisler-time-for-the-opposition-to-wake-up]. 2 reforms? Where are the Social Democrats’ proposals for salary and benefit hikes, job retention? Why aren't solutions offered to core voters?7 Representing the media segment in the intra-political debate, Kiisler, naturally, praised the role of the press in Estonia, underscoring its ability to promptly address both “foolishness and major mistakes on the government’s part”8. The journalist’s main point, as argued, was about the necessity for the country’s political system to ensure that the Government is “afraid of the opposition as democracy will crumble otherwise”9. Somebody from the oppositional side of the political spectrum needed to reply to such a serious critique, and a substantial response came in almost immediately – next day. Raimond Kaljulaid, a high-profile ‘social democrat’ (he commenced his ‘journey’ in the Riigikogu as a member of the Centre Party’s faction but soon left his party to move to the opposition), agreed that a) Kiisler’s article is “a noteworthy text and criticism” and b) that “the voter increasingly finds themselves in a situation where they are offered the same goods, simply in different packaging”, but disagreed in principle that “the opposition has wasted the entire spring and summer without offering any alternative to the government’s policy”10. Being fully aware that he would need to be precise with his counter-arguments, Kaljulaid went ahead and specified the following points. Firstly, he argued, the political right-wing cluster “is a passing phenomenon”, and such an “ideology in its recent form is […] rather fighting retreating battles”11. Secondly, Kaljulaid noted that he is “working toward a social democratic age” with Estonia being set for “constructing a welfare state on the prosperity we [ha]ve created over the past three decades”, having the example of the Nordic countries but of “a post-digital turn age”12. Thirdly, the oppositional politician suggested that the upcoming “local government council elections make for a good sandbox in which to practice”13, hinting that the aforementioned elections’ outcome can naturally represent a good indication on the voter’s mood, intentions, and political wishes. Most probably, Kaljulaid’s arguments could have been much more detailed in regards of prospective policy changes. At the same time, one should not forget that, during the 2019 European Parliament election in Estonia, Raimond Kaljulaid, while 7 Kiisler. 8 Kiisler. 9 Kiisler. 10 Raimond Kaljulaid, ‘Opposition awake but there is room for improvement’ in ERR, 17 September 2020. Available from [https://news.err.ee/1136135/raimond-kaljulaid-opposition-awake-but-there-is-room-for- improvement]. 11 Kaljulaid. 12 Kaljulaid. 13 Kaljulaid. 3 representing only himself, ‘scored’ big numbers – 6.2 per cent of the country’s total votes14. It can only mean that his move from the ruling ‘centrists’ to the oppositional ‘social democrats’ can create a substantial difference for both parties – a negative difference for the former and a positive one for the latter. Therefore, in the nearest future, his personality can be associated with a ‘game changing’ situation in Estonia’s internal politics. Possibly, he is sensing something that the others are missing completely. Interestingly enough, Toomas Hendrik Ilves, in the final part of his article that was already cited in this briefing, expressed his desire that “the younger generation still holds those who, in spite of their zeitgeist, can bring Estonian intellectualism back to its roots”15. Most definitely, the former President did not mean any particular names, but, while paying tribute to a remarkable Estonian publicist who passed away 10 years ago, Ilves picked up on a notable factor that “genuine Estonian spirit, sense of the world and wit that allowed [the country] to rise from the Soviet swamp” can hardly be found these days. This is indeed the ‘autumn’ of Estonian internal politics of the post-1991 period. A new generation of local politicians are arriving, but, for this kind of ‘spring’ to blossom, the country will still need to survive the intra-political ‘winter’.