Let's speculate to start with. Would you agree that the most likely scenario after the 2027 [Riigikogu] elections is one where Isamaa and the Center Party will definitely bring the Social Democrats into government as well? It's obvious that the Reform Party needs time on the opposition bench to regroup and reorganize and EKRE will remain in opposition as a hardline niche party. According to sociologist Aivar Voog, Isamaa has a core voter base of about 10 percent. The current support — firmly over 20 percent — could melt down to that 10 percent level if circumstances turn unfavorable. In that case, wouldn't a third coalition partner be necessary?

That's one possible scenario, but certainly not the only one. It all depends on what kind of Riigikogu the Estonian voter decides to give the country for the next four years. The current political landscape as a whole is quite turbulent and I believe we may see significant changes in the coming year.

One thing is true: the Center Party has essentially become Isamaa's Tallinn branch. Their union when forming the Tallinn coalition runs much deeper than it appears at first glance, so it's very likely they'll remain key allies after the next parliamentary elections as well.

But the opportunities this duo or other parties might have will depend on many factors, including whether Isamaa can maintain its high ratings and convert them into actual votes come election time.

If we look at the last two elections, Isamaa's polling numbers have been remarkably high since the end of 2023, yet in the European Parliament elections, they ended up neck and neck with the Social Democrats. In the local elections, despite a 30-percent nationwide rating, they still fell behind the Social Democrats in Tallinn. So I'd say there are still quite a few question marks around whether Isamaa is really in a position to pick and choose left and right when it comes to forming a government.

Eesti 200 has been trying to save itself by once again raising issues of values. Will the campaign for the Riigikogu elections, which kicks off already this summer, once again be a battle over values or will it focus more on practical matters like the cost of living and the state of the economy?

Just a brief comment on Aivar Voog's assessment: what exactly is a party's "core voter"? If we look at support for Isamaa (previously IRL) from 2015 to 2023, it averaged around 5 percent — they couldn't hit 10 percent to save their lives. So I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the number of people who would vote for Isamaa in any and all circumstances is even a bit lower than that.

Of course, a large portion of Isamaa's current support is ephemeral and the reason is clear to everyone — it's the deep disappointment with the Reform Party, which has let its voters down. It's a rather astonishing situation, really.

If we remember the 2023 parliamentary elections, the Reform Party won its 38 seats largely because a significant portion of the Estonian public didn't want to see a coalition of Isamaa, the Center Party and EKRE.

It was fear that drove people to vote for the Reform Party. Now, after the Reform Party has disappointed its voters, a considerable number of them have, surprisingly, shifted their support to Isamaa, the very party whose return to power they feared just a year ago. How that dynamic plays out in the coming months depends on a wide range of variables.

As for Eesti 200, I'd put it this way: whatever it once was, it no longer is. The final throes of a dying organism tend to be a spectacle, but in my view, there's little point in analyzing them too seriously.

Looking ahead to the next elections, will the focus be on the cost of living or on value-based issues?

It's still a bit difficult to predict at this point, but I dare say that for many people, what really matters is the return of normal, calm and trustworthy governance.

The Reform Party has failed to live up to the expectations placed on it. On the other hand, I get the sense that people are also growing tired of [Isamaa leader] Urmas Reinsalu's grandiose rhetoric and largely empty talk. In a time of socio-economic and geopolitical uncertainty, what people want is calm and professional leadership — perhaps fewer fantastic new ideas and over-the-top promises. Parties are used to claiming ahead of elections that life is going to get so wonderful that people won't even be able to imagine it.

Maybe this time, there's less appetite for empty promises and, hopefully, the parties' platforms will be more realistic.

That said, from today's perspective, Isamaa's actions have been a textbook example of populism: low taxes and high benefits — even though everyone understands that, given the current security and fiscal situation, that's just not realistic.

Speaking of taxes: as of January 1, the tax hump (Estonia's gradual basic exemption reduction scheme – ed.) was eliminated under pressure from the Reform Party. On this issue, the Social Democrats and Isamaa likely share a similar view — that higher earners should be taxed more. But when it comes to the car tax, their positions seem to diverge sharply...

Honestly, it feels a bit strange to be spending societal energy debating whether a given tax rate should be one percent higher or lower. We're in a much tougher position than these discussions seem to acknowledge.

The uncertainty around us is significant and our economic outlook depends heavily on how well things go in Europe. When you look at the rampage in the china shop happening across the ocean and what our once-closest ally is up to, there are a lot of question marks hanging in the air.

I would hope that the focus of our next parliamentary election debates isn't on whether to tweak a tax slightly up or down. That's cosmetic policy-making that wastes public energy — something that may stir up emotions but doesn't really address the actual challenges we're facing.

Looking back at the 2023 coalition agreement (between Reform, SDE and Eesti 200 –ed.), the public was shocked when it was made public. In hindsight, what went wrong? Party ratings dropped, tensions rose and progress stalled on many issues.

First of all, the parties managed to give people a false picture of the situation we were actually in at the start of 2023. The Riigikogu had already decided to increase defense spending by 50 percent, yet most parties — perhaps with the exception of the Social Democrats — were promising lower taxes and higher benefits. We all remember Kaja Kallas' now meme-worthy promise not to raise taxes.

If people were left with the impression that life would go on as before or even get easier after the elections, the reality was quite the opposite. People were initially happy, only to be disappointed when the hopeful horizon they'd been sold didn't materialize.

Secondly, the coalition led by Kaja Kallas had ambitious goals in several areas, including energy policy, but unfortunately, the government quickly ran aground and lost its ability to act. The agreed-upon reforms couldn't be implemented. The public backlash led to a drop in support and internal paralysis, which continues to this day.

These things are connected. The Reform Party saw its support plummeting like a stone and, in response, began avoiding all decisions that truly mattered — a lot ended up not getting done.

But why did things fall apart so quickly in the first place?

The shock felt by voters, who had been led by the Reform Party to expect the opposite, immediately undermined the coalition's internal ability to function. There were likely personal factors at play as well. It was clear that Kaja Kallas and Kristen Michal were not in sync, especially when it came to the Ministry of Climate where many key decisions needed to be made. You could sense that Mr. Michal wanted to become prime minister himself — in the end, that's exactly what happened.

So was Michal more in favor of the ideas that are now being implemented by the current government — for example, scaling back aspects of the green transition?

It seemed to me more that he wasn't working toward ensuring Kaja Kallas' success as prime minister. That's probably the most accurate way to put it.

This year brings presidential elections. The coalition council made the first move and reached out to the Social Democrats who laughed off the offer. How likely is it that the president will even be elected by the Riigikogu? In addition, Eesti 200 seems like a sinking ship, with the crew ignoring the captain's party discipline. So even if the three coalition parties agree, there's a high risk of defections. Does that mean they'll also need votes from Isamaa to secure a majority?

I don't speak for the entire party, but based on past experience, I'm not very optimistic that the process will unfold in a logical way. We're more likely heading for confusion, for two reasons.

First, the parliamentary elections are too close and it's clear that Reinsalu and several other politicians very much want to see the Reform Party fail. They'll want to push the process into the Electoral College to put on a show and boost their ratings. The Electoral College can also be used to raise the profile of certain politicians. That kind of play is useful right before a parliamentary election.

Second, Estonia's political culture has seen a serious erosion in the ability to make and stick to agreements.

Can we realistically imagine something like what happened before Toomas Hendrik Ilves was elected president when parties scored the candidates, agreed on procedures and then actually followed them?

For this process to succeed, we'd need to reach a shared understanding with the parties within the next few months. But I'm not convinced that any agreement made with Kristen Michal today will still hold in August. Just look at what happened under the Reform Party's leadership last summer in Tallinn or any number of other things. That sense of reliability when it comes to the Reform Party simply isn't there.

I predict the process will be sideways, so to speak. It'll eventually produce some sort of result, but I'm not optimistic that it will be well thought out.

But the Reform Party really needs the election to take place in the Riigikogu. If it goes to the Electoral College and things fall apart there, the blame will be placed squarely on the prime minister's party. In that sense, a failed process would actually suit all the other parties, wouldn't it?

Of course, the expectations for them [Reform] are higher. Kristen Michal surely remembers 2016 when one of his predecessors tried to keep kicking the can down the road until there was no longer any room left for an agreement and the whole thing fell apart completely. Their clear preference is for a negotiated deal.

But the real question is: who is the candidate that suits them and can also win enough votes in parliament? Today, it might seem like an agreement is possible, but come August, the Reform Party might feel the Social Democrats are doing too well and decide to walk away from the deal. Trust has become extremely scarce.

The Social Democrats are looking at a leadership election this year. Will Lauri Läänemets be able to continue without challenge or can we expect new candidates?

At the moment, no new candidates are on the horizon. Once the party congress is officially announced, people will make their decisions.

Are you personally satisfied with Lauri Läänemets' leadership?

I think the party has done quite well during these turbulent years. That said, it doesn't mean we don't need a new strategic approach looking ahead to the future and the next elections. That's a discussion we're currently having.

The Social Democrats held a strategy day this week. What is the party's goal and what would count as a failure — eight, ten or twelve seats?

We don't spend strategy days defining what would count as failure. I see it more as a moment of opportunity. A large number of Reform Party voters are disappointed and looking for a new political force. Right now, some of them are drawn to Urmas Reinsalu's rhetoric, but in substance, neither the Center Party nor Isamaa truly represent those voters' values. The Social Democrats have a real opportunity to achieve a result that's significantly better than current polling suggests.

So your hope is that the main political contrast will be between Isamaa and the Social Democrats, since EKRE is already playing in the lower league and there's no point in contrasting to them?

It seems to me that EKRE hasn't really been playing at all for quite some time. That's probably a good thing for Estonia. In a situation where the Reform Party has broken down, the Social Democrats' mission is to offer an alternative for people who value freedoms and individual choice. Our task is to present a compelling vision for how to keep Estonia on a sensible development path over the next four years.

Finally, how are you spending your days now? You're no longer mayor and you can't be a member of the Riigikogu anymore.

I'm taking some time to rest and recover after a demanding period. I'm spending more time with my family and children and I stay involved in local and national politics as much as needed.

You'll definitely be running in the Riigikogu elections?

(Pauses) I haven't made a final decision yet, but most likely, yes.

--

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