In Setomaa, on a narrow strip of land known as the Saatse Boot — which juts into Estonian territory but belongs to Russia — the Värska–Saatse road runs for about 800 meters, offering a shortcut for local residents. The road's use was formalized in 2003 by an agreement between Estonian and Russian border representatives, allowing Estonian vehicles to pass through the "boot" without stopping or walking there. Taking the detour around the area adds several kilometers of unpaved roads to the journey between nearby villages.

The Saatse Boot issue came sharply into focus on Friday, when border guards noticed armed Russian soldiers without insignia on the road and closed it to prevent possible provocations. It is known that Estonian police, border guards and other officials have long avoided using the stretch, as driving through it technically means entering Russian territory — and therefore coming under its jurisdiction.

The border treaty between Estonia and Russia has, over the years, either been signed but left unratified or on the verge of being concluded — under which the Saatse Boot area and the road running through it were to belong to Estonia.

"In fact, preparations for the border treaty began already in the 1990s and everyone knew that the Saatse Boot would go to Estonia — both the Russian and Estonian sides agreed. So, there wasn't really a sharp dispute there and that also answers the question of why the bypass road hasn't been built earlier," explained Janek Mägi, head of the border guard and migration policy department at the Ministry of the Interior.

The still-unratified treaty stipulates that Estonia and Russia would exchange 128.6 hectares of land during border adjustments, with both sides swapping equal-sized plots along the border, Postimees reported back in 2013.

Following Friday's incident, the government pledged to speed up the long-delayed construction of the bypass road. On Monday, Minister of Infrastructure Kuldar Leis (Reform) announced that the government plans to amend the law to waive the environmental impact assessment currently blocking the project. If the amendment passes, construction could begin in 2026 and be completed by the end of the same year.

Estonian and Russian foreign ministers have signed the border agreement twice

The Estonian and Russian delegations first agreed on the main text of the border treaty in October 1996. On March 5, 1999, both sides' delegation heads — Raul Mälk for Estonia and Ludvig Tchizhov for Russia — initialed the technically finalized drafts of both treaties, along with all annexes, according to a Riigikogu overview.

Since then, successive Estonian governments have repeatedly confirmed their readiness to sign the treaties. In 2005, negotiations concluded with both sides agreeing on the final text.

Marko Mihkelson, chair of the Riigikogu Foreign Affairs Committee, has pointed to one possible reason Russia changed its stance: by 2004, Estonia had joined both NATO and the European Union, despite the absence of a border treaty.

The border treaty, which defines the course of the land and maritime borders between Estonia and Russia, was signed in Moscow on May 18, 2005, by then–Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov.

However, during ratification, the Riigikogu — at the initiative of Res Publica and Isamaa MPs and on the recommendation of Chancellor of Justice Allar Jõks — decided to include a preamble in the ratification law. The preamble referenced the 1920 Treaty of Tartu as the foundation of Estonia's legal continuity.

That move prompted Russia to withdraw its signature from the treaty and refuse ratification, arguing that by citing the Treaty of Tartu, Estonia could potentially make territorial claims. Under the Tartu treaty, Estonia's territory would indeed be slightly larger at Russia's expense.

Estonia and Russia signed a new border treaty on February 18, 2014 — once again by Paet and Lavrov — this time with two additional clarifying sentences affirming that neither side had territorial claims and that the treaty regulated only border-related issues.

The Estonian government introduced the ratification bill for the treaty on March 7, 2014 and it passed its first reading in the Riigikogu on April 16 that year. The bill did not reach its second (final) reading before the parliament's term ended, causing it to lapse; the government would need to reintroduce it. The Russian parliament, for its part, has made no moves toward ratification. After Russia launched its aggression against Ukraine in the spring of 2014, the topic again became highly sensitive and made no progress.

Following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, Estonia's relations with Moscow have deteriorated even further, leaving the border treaty completely sidelined.

Politicians do not consider adding the preamble a mistake

Although not all Riigikogu factions initially supported adding a preamble referring to the Treaty of Tartu to the 2005 border treaty, the ratification passed on June 20 that year with 78 votes in favor. Supporters of the preamble stressed that it applied only to the ratification law, not to the treaty itself.

"We all know how things work in Estonian politics. Domestically, it was very difficult for political forces to oppose it," Reform Party member Urmas Paet, who at first did not support the idea but later voted in favor, told ERR.

When ERR asked Reform MP — and former Res Publica member — Marko Mihkelson, who supported adding the preamble, whether that decision could be seen as a root cause of the current situation, he rejected the suggestion outright.

"We will never know whether Russia would have moved forward with ratification or not, because the events of 2014 prove the point — Russia had absolutely no obstacles to ratify the 2014 treaty, which was signed by the foreign ministers. There was nothing preventing it. Estonia had shown readiness to proceed with ratification. So, I maintain that blaming Estonia in this context is entirely unfounded, because we have no information suggesting things would have gone differently if that sentence hadn't been added to the ratification law," Mihkelson said.

"If someone now concludes that we don't have a border with Russia because of what happened in 2005, that's more in line with Russia's narrative than Estonia's interests," he continued. "Russia has never demonstrated any willingness to actually conclude or ratify the border treaty, as history shows. And in 2005, there was nothing preventing them from doing so after our ratification, because — once again — legally, the preamble had no effect on the treaty itself; the treaty text did not change during ratification," Mihkelson emphasized.

"It would be more accurate to say that Russia has never shown a desire to bring the border treaty with Estonia into force. That's the real truth," he added, noting that the border treaty has consistently been one of the most divisive topics in Estonian foreign policy.

Social Democrat Sven Mikser shared a similar view, acknowledging that while there were domestic disagreements in Estonia regarding the treaty, its ratification and entry into force would not have prevented Russia's current behavior.

"I think we certainly could have moved the border treaties into what you might call a logical phase at the time. There were attempts, though some political reservations existed within Estonia's conservative wing. But ultimately, the responsibility for the treaties not being ratified bilaterally lies with Russia," Mikser said. "In any case, that would not have prevented Russia's provocations today, nor its aggression against Ukraine and everything that followed. So those connections are indirect at best. I'm definitely not willing to point fingers and say that any domestic Estonian political intrigue, calculation or maneuver is to blame for Russia carrying out provocations in the Saatse Boot today," he emphasized.

Mihkelson, who now heads up the Riigikogu Foreign Affairs Committee, repeatedly recalled that even after Estonia and Russia signed the renewed border treaty in 2014, it too remains unratified.

"Most recently, we had agreed with the Russian parliament that by late 2013 — when it was already known that the treaty would be signed — we would move directly toward ratification afterward. There was even a preliminary understanding that by the end of 2014, Lavrov would have come to Estonia to exchange the ratification instruments," Mihkelson told ERR.

Russia not about to become less aggressive

According to Mihkelson, there is no indication that Russia will be ready to ratify the border treaty in the foreseeable future. "I believe Russia's interest is to act far more aggressively, as we've seen in the case of Ukraine," he added.

Mikser likewise emphasized Russia's aggressive behavior, noting that nothing Estonia could have done would have prevented it.

"Today's situation clearly stems from Russia's aggression against Ukraine and the general escalation of tensions between Russia and NATO and between Russia and Europe," Mikser said. "In that sense, Russia is provoking all its neighbors — not only those directly bordering it, but also those farther away. So, regarding Russia's provocations toward us, no action or inaction in the more distant past would have changed that."

While Mihkelson said that having a border treaty with Russia would be in Estonia's interest, he acknowledged that there is currently no realistic path toward concluding one.

"This treaty is important for us precisely because Russia is becoming more aggressive," said Mihkelson. "For Estonia's security, it would be best if our borders were defined through a bilateral treaty, with the border line clearly recognized under international law. [But] at the moment, there's no sign that we'll reach a situation anytime soon where Russia would be ready to ratify the treaty," he added.

--

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