After the three Russian MiG-31 jets entered Estonian airspace without authorization on Friday, September 19, Estonia convened the UN Security Council session, part of a busy UN High Level week which Tsahkna and President Alar Karis attended.

That meeting at the UN was a big day for Estonian diplomacy, and the fact that Estonia got so much attention and airtime was put across quite a lot in our media. Did you get that same feeling there on the spot, that we had finally managed to deliver our message?

We convened political consultations under NATO Article 4, and the UN Security Council also received very major attention. Add to that those 50 countries who amassed behind us — those countries were not only from Europe and NATO, but from all over the world. The last foreign minister who joined up and said he wanted to be a part of it was Fiji's, and that is highly important, as otherwise the Security Council and that whole week would probably have been spent mainly on Gaza. Ukraine would also certainly have been there somehow on the sidelines, but with this step, we really brought attention not only to Ukraine, but also to the fact that Russia is an aggressor state. It is already coming against NATO, and the fact that the principle of territorial integrity is being violated by Russia also towards NATO, that gets global resonance, because simply this is a concern that many other countries have.

When a session like this is convened, then one must be prepared for very many different scenarios even if behind you there is a whole lot of countries who probably think similarly. At the same time, there are those who say we must still have peaceful negotiations, plus in addition Russia was also at that meeting. What strategies did you have planned, so that our message would resonate very strongly?

A lot of preparatory work was done with those members of the Security Council. We also cooperated with those who are not our everyday allies. Preparatory work was done with all of them, explanations were given and facts were provided, in advance.

Is it standard practice that a minister goes and prints out colored posters from the printer in order that the information can be seen?

It is not standard practice, but we certainly assumed that the Russian would start lying. A Russian would simply come in with his lie, so our task was to demonstrate to the whole world and also to the Security Council real radar images, where the airspace violation can be seen, and also to show the aircraft — not just pictures of airplanes — which actually came in. Those images were taken from the Italian fighter jets, and the most important thing was to show that they (the Russian MiGs – ed.) were carrying missiles and that these were actually combat-ready aircraft. That was the core message we actually showed there. Of course, the fact that the Russians are blatantly lying, on top of that.

They (the Russians – ed.) say that Europe is sowing panic and this was not a hostile act.

When you have that picture in front of you and it is an actual radar image from NATO, where you can see where they came in [to Estonian airspace], where they were during the whole period, and where they exited, then it is simply not viable to argue against that. This is a document in fact.

The Russian representative made his speech at the UN and then left the hall practically immediately. Is it at all viable to meet him or Russian representatives, there in the corridors?

It is possible to meet them. [Russian foreign minister] Sergei Lavrov also walked past me several times and very close by, but those corridors are full of foreign ministers, presidents and diplomats. Indeed the Russian diplomat left, but they put in his stead a woman who was taking notes, but who presumably has no clearance to speak.

But this event was set in the much broader picture, since Poland had been attacked before. Poland also convened the Security Council, and what was most vital was that very many other foreign ministers, observers and analysts, also among U.S. Republicans — we also had meetings with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special representative [to Ukraine] Keith Kellogg — said that this step of ours may have been the last straw for U.S. President Donald Trump, where his patience sort of ran out, and he no longer trusts Putin.

Trump also said that if Russian fighters should again fly over NATO territory, then they should be shot down. Is this an indicator or a message to Russian fighters and drones flying in our airspace that if now one comes, then it will be shot down?

What Trump said, that Russia is weak, will lose the war and that their economy is going to the wall, is a very major shift. Up to now Trump had been fed [the belief] and believed that Russia would win the war. So this is a very big change. Now let us see if anything will also follow from the U.S., though Europe is doing much more. Immediately after Trump's speech there was a meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Trump also took place. We got a very clear overview from that, that U.S. support exists. We'll see what comes of that, and the fact that NATO fighters would shoot down Russian fighters … That is language that Russian President Vladimir Putin understands. It is an extremely strong message, when the U.S. president states it so clearly.

Does Putin still have that playful sense? Perhaps he would try and see that if we now go and send one fighter and they don't shoot it down, then their word does not hold.

That is always a risk in that respect, but I would also say, for the sake of people's reassurance, that if, for example, with the Estonian incident, there had been a direct military threat then, then those fighters would have been shot down. NATO has its standards and procedures.

That would not have been any issue, but we did not have a direct military threat. Of course, when the President of the United States says that, if necessary, we will fire, that gives such a political directive that if next time NATO airspace is really violated and there is a military threat, then Russian fighters will also indeed be shot down.

Our focus has been very much on the war in Ukraine. But it seems to me that the world's attention is rather more on Israel and Gaza. What were the feelings there at the UN and NATO when you met people? Is it even possible to get your Ukraine message through right now?

Certainly the war between Israel and Palestine is what has been getting a lot of attention and would have gotten even more if there had not been, for example, our own Security Council session. The next day the Ukrainians convened their own Security Council session exactly on the same theme. President Trump also stated in his speech very clearly his support for Ukraine and that Russia will lose. Ukraine did receive a lot of attention, and precisely due to Trump's statements, but yes, very many countries had prepared their positions exactly for this conference of the two states, meaning Palestine and Israel.

Estonia has stated quite clearly on the recognition of Palestine as a state, that we do not recognize the State of Palestine. Have there been any changes on this?

We do not plan to recognize the State of Palestine, that is to say, to change our current policy. However, we did join the two-state declaration, which is concrete pressure on both Israel and Hamas to end this conflict, release the hostages and reach a ceasefire, and to move forward from there. We have no direct plan to alter our position politically, but the situation there is nevertheless a catastrophic one.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!