Toomas Hendrik Ilves: More of Europe now taking defense, security seriously

In an interview with ERR, former President Toomas Hendrik Ilves explained that it was Volt Europa's comprehensive vision for Europe's future that drew him to the pan-European political movement, and highlighted positive signs that Europe is starting to take security policy more seriously.
What ultimately prompted you to join Volt Europa instead of some other political force on the European level?
My serious concern for the future. It's been building for a long time. If you read my 2024 Independence Day speech at the University of Tartu, on February 23, I tried to say back then that things are getting serious. And they've gotten much more serious.
Most political forces in Europe are currently expressing concern about the future.
The question is, what are they actually doing about it? If the answer is, "We're very concerned, but we definitely can't do this or we definitely can't do that," then it's relatively pointless.
When I looked at who had taken a more comprehensive position, I saw Volt. I looked into them, read [their materials], and thought, oh, this is much closer than other political forces to what we unfortunately need right now. It seems like a party that's working on the issues that have mattered to me all my life.
How will you contribute to that political movement — ideologically? Not by leading campaigns?
I'm a member of its pan-European movement; I'm not active in politics. At least not in that kind of politics. I'm a member; I write articles and give speeches about security policy. I'm about to publish a report — in about a week and a half. That's what I'm involved in.
The local Estonian chapter of Volt recently posted on Facebook that they support the creation of a joint European army. Do you share that view too, then? And in that case, how should a European army be structured, and what kind of relationship should it have with NATO?
That may happen in the future, but right now we just need to defend Europe, which is why we need to implement major reforms long before we start forming a joint army. One thing is in the distant future; right now, we're dealing with much more crucial existential matters.
One question that inevitably comes up with your joining [Volt] is whether we might see you running for any elected positions.
No, no, no.
So just on an ideological level, then. You'll be writing and contributing ideas?
I'll keep doing what I do. Someone can be a plumber and belong to a party — that doesn't mean they have to do anything else.
I'm a retiree who writes about security and digital issues. And I simply support a party like this politically. I find it appealing, but I'm not engaging in party politics at all.
Well, you're not exactly a typical retiree. And Volt Europa as a party was quite pleased that you joined — they publicized it pretty heavily.
Well, what can you do.
Are you complaining about that?
Why should I complain? If they're happy, that's great. But I'm not an active party politician.
In your view, how could Volt increase its influence in Europe? Right now they only have five seats in the European Parliament.
I believe it'll start happening anyway, considering all the challenges I've also written about. These are the problems I see, and I look at which parties in Europe are willing to tackle them — and it seems like that's Volt moreso than anyone else.
You've described the challenges facing Europe in quite dark terms. Are you, for instance, thoroughly convinced that the relationship with the U.S. is now irreparably damaged — that we can no longer expect a trustworthy alliance from their side?
I wouldn't say irreparably. But that's precisely the current situation.
What can Europe do to pull itself together?
Pull itself together, and follow the [former European Central Bank chief Mario] Draghi report [on EU competitiveness], which outlines precisely the same things. Maybe not the foreign policy aspect, but the reforms that need to be done are in the Draghi report — which unfortunately received too little coverage in Estonia.
Do you see any positive signs in Europe that it's starting to come together — that things are moving in that direction?
A little. If you look at the latest initiative, which at least allows for taking out loans outside of current restrictions if those loans are for defense purposes.
If you look at the actions and positions of the new German chancellor — considering that Germany has, for at least the past 20 years, if not more — been a bottleneck on security matters during both [outgoing Chancellor Olaf] Scholz's and [former Chancellor Angela] Merkel's time.
I'd remind you that a year after Crimea's annexation, Merkel celebrated signing the Nord Stream 2 agreement with fanfare. Let's not forget all the obstruction from Scholz, who didn't want to do anything to help Ukraine, didn't want to send Taurus missiles there.
The arrival of [the next chancellor, Friedrich] Merz is a rather positive development.
If we look at the increase in defense spending at least in the Nordic and Baltic countries and in Poland, we can see that after 35 years of decline, Europe is now taking defense readiness very seriously — especially countries in Northern Europe.
We still have a long way to go in Southern Europe, but at least part of Europe is now taking defense and security very seriously.
Does that also send a strong enough message to Russia?
We don't need to send messages to Russia; we need to pull ourselves together. Those messages... They spy on us enough as it is. We don't need to send messages.
So in a sense, U.S. President Donald Trump's actions are doing Europe a favor too? Pushing Europe to rekindle its strength and unity?
I'd like to hope so. The various threats he's made have caused some to think twice. The threat to tell Russia, "Do whatever you want" if a state hasn't met the two percent [of GDP defense spending] target — I'm sure that sounded pretty frightening to some countries.
Perhaps even more decisive was the moment he said he's negotiating with Russia without Europe, and actually said that Europe has no place at the table — despite [the issue] concerning a European country — Ukraine.
I'm actually very curious — what do you think about that U.S.-Ukraine natural resources deal? And should Europe have been included in it?
Well, personally, I believe they should have been. But let's just say that from Ukraine's perspective, it was clearly a decision made under duress and blackmail. They're very afraid of being cut off. Let's again recall that the U.S. recently stopped sharing intelligence with Ukraine. They shut down Maxar's reconnaissance satellites that had been providing intelligence to the Ukrainians. That has a direct impact on warfare. So the situation is pretty dire — more dire than many in Europe want to believe.
But the natural resources deal itself — as several top U.S. officials, including Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, have said — is already a kind of security guarantee, a basis for future security guarantees for Ukraine, showing that the U.S. is active there and has interests there. You don't agree with this view?
Unfortunately, U.S. policy has been so erratic and is completely in Trump's hands. What someone lower down says doesn't really count.
That same Bessent has said several things that turned out to be wrong — about tariffs, for example. So if Bessent says something, especially when it comes to security — well, I won't be so sure about that.
Especially when you look at yesterday's developments — we have no idea what's going to happen next. We know that [Secretary of State Marco] Rubio is now temporarily also the national security adviser. But if you look at what Rubio said a few years ago and what he's saying now, you can see there's a very big difference.
What do you make of national security adviser Mike Waltz being appointed U.S. ambassador to the UN? Was that a promotion or him being reminded of his place?
That was a consolation prize.
Does this reflect any kind of accountability from the administration regarding the Signal group chat scandal?
It's very hard to say whether that was a result of the Signal group or whether that was some sort of broader dissatisfaction. We don't know what's going on there. When the people I know who understand U.S. domestic politics and behavior very well can't say — then I'm not going to start speculating here either.
--
Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!
Editor: Aili Vahtla