Vilja Kiisler questioned the appropriateness of the president's remarks, while Indrek Kiisler saw domestic politics behind the criticism of Karis.

In recent months, there have been several analyses of what President Alar Karis has actually meant by his foreign policy statements. We'll continue that discussion this morning as well.

Let's go back to yesterday, when [Finnish President] Alexander Stubb seemed, in fact, to agree with what Alar Karis had said — that at some point we will have to start communicating with our neighbor Russia. What impression did yesterday and Karis's ideas leave on you?

Vilja Kiisler: There's a long backstory to Karis's ideas. If you look at Karis's statements starting with the Kazakhstan scandal, a clear pattern emerges. It's something that differs from Estonia's foreign policy line and gives the impression that the Estonian president is trying to present himself abroad as a great visionary with a broader perspective. The only problem is that this broader perspective doesn't really materialize — no vision appears. In reality, Karis is repeating trivialities: we live next to Russia and we're not going anywhere.

There wouldn't be anything inherently wrong with that if everything he says about Russia and relations with Russia didn't carry some kind of ghastly, disturbing undertone that scares me every time. My heart leaps into my throat every time Karis says something new.

And of course I don't want to say — nor even think — that our president is somehow pro-Russian. Far from it; we wouldn't want to entertain anything like that at all. But the pattern is frightening, especially because the president is the supreme commander of national defense. In a crisis, the country's behavior and decisions depend on his choices.

And increasingly I ask myself: if we were in a situation comparable to 1940, or to Ukraine in 2022, what decisions would the president make as commander-in-chief? Would he talk about ceding territory? Would he talk about the need for diplomatic engagement with Russia?

Most recently in Finland, he reproached the European Union for failing to exhaust diplomatic options in 2022. Yet no foreign policy expert understands what exactly Karis meant or what diplomatic options Europe might have had, given that we know all too well that Russia's plans haven't changed, Russia's attitudes haven't changed — Russia remains a threat.

So where does this come from? Everyone emphasizes that Estonia's foreign policy is unified, yet somehow something different seems to seep through.

Indrek Kiisler: I don't agree with you in the sense that Karis is somehow pro-Russian or that we should fear that he's going to start befriending Russia…

Vilja Kiisler: Don't put words in my mouth — I didn't say that…

Indrek Kiisler: I'm not, but Estonian politicians talk, and the same undertone is present in your remarks: that Karis has supposedly said we need to start engaging with Russia, more or less like that. Reform Party members, Social Democrats, Eesti 200 — all have said that Karis wants to restore relations with Russia, start doing business there, whatever.

What Karis has said is that we're in a situation where the war in Ukraine will end sooner or later, and we need a plan for what happens next.

Vilja Kiisler: Do you really think the Foreign Ministry isn't thinking about this? Do you really think —

Indrek Kiisler: But I don't hear a single statement about this from the Foreign Ministry. Has our foreign minister or have our diplomats talked about it? No, they haven't!

Vilja Kiisler: Should they?

Indrek Kiisler: They should, of course.

Vilja Kiisler: But they should do it at home, among themselves — not with Karis going abroad, as Alar Karis personally rather than as the president of Estonia, and saying something that takes our breath away here. This debate should take place at home.

Indrek Kiisler: Did it take our breath away when the German Chancellor said exactly the same thing two days ago — that if Ukraine wants to become a member of the European Union, it will likely have to give up some Ukrainian territory? Did our foreign minister send a letter to the German ambassador saying, "Listen, Chancellor [Friedrich] Merz is undermining the EU's unified position"? No, he didn't!

So are we being overly critical of Karis here at home?

Indrek Kiisler: I think this issue tightly intertwines domestic and foreign policy — there's a lot of labeling going on. I'd even somewhat compare it to the situation with Kersti Kaljulaid two days ago, where it no longer mattered what she said or what she did at the Olympic Committee. Two camps emerged that simply slapped labels on her. The same thing has happened with Karis.

Vilja Kiisler: You're trying to turn this into some kind of domestic political struggle, but in my view it's much more than that. Yes, politicians have reacted sharply, and there's a reason for that.

But it shouldn't work this way, that President Alar Karis goes abroad and says something where we don't know what he actually means. Karis has been very skillful. He has never really substantiated his criticism of the Foreign Ministry, which has been massive and far-reaching. Every time he says something, he then softens it, as though he had said something else.

You may focus on the words, but there's an undertone to all of this that can't be ignored — and that undertone is disturbing and frightening, because we don't know what he really thinks. And when he's asked for clarifications — what he actually meant — those clarifications don't come. The vision doesn't come, even though he tries to present himself as a visionary. And that's dangerous.

Indrek Kiisler: Right now in Estonia there has been — understandably — a doctrine that we must achieve a just peace in Ukraine. I support that very much too. Ideally, the scenario would be: Russians out of Ukraine, Putin stands trial, Russia becomes a democratic country — but that's not going to happen.

That means we also need well-thought-out solutions on the table for very bad scenarios. Has our Foreign Ministry presented these? No. I think Karis's line of thinking is rather that we need to be prepared for the worse. And in fact, in much more refined diplomatic language, the Finnish president has been talking about this for a very long time.

Vilja Kiisler: The Finnish president has a very different intellectual position and standing in international relations. And we also can't forget that Finland has a completely different history — they lost a part of their territory and maintained independence. We lived for decades under Soviet occupation; our history is different and can't be brushed aside now.

Estonia's role should be to remind European countries — which don't want to invest as much in defense as we do — of the fact that Russia is dangerous and Russia's goals haven't changed. And then Karis goes abroad and talks about how we need to start communicating with Russia once the war is over.

Indrek Kiisler: He hasn't said that we need to start communicating with Russia; he's said that we need to be prepared for the situation when the war ends.

And as you're demonstrating right now, we can interpret these things very differently. What does that ultimately say about the situation we're in?

Vilja Kiisler: And indeed, I truly don't know what Karis really thinks. This situation would be significantly alleviated if it were possible to ask Karis these questions and if he would answer them candidly. But every time he's committed some faux pas abroad and stands before journalists, what we get is some mumbling — there's no clear explanation of the vision he actually represents. And this constantly sows dissatisfaction, doubt, and fear.

Where did this situation come from? It started somewhere back in Kazakhstan. Is this all connected to the presidential election, or what is it?

Indrek Kiisler: It certainly is connected, because clearly both the foreign minister [Margus] Tsahkna and the Reform Party can't say that Alar Karis is very popular among the Estonian people. And since they need to create an atmosphere that Karis is, I don't know, pro-Russian — everything we're hearing now — they keep pushing and amplifying that narrative more and more, so they can perhaps put forward their own candidate. I can't say for sure whether that's the case.

Vilja Kiisler: You're trying to give the impression that the Reform Party has said on Karis's behalf the things Karis himself has said — that's not how it is!

Indrek Kiisler: No, but the Reform Party is… Well, look at how Urmas Paet wrote, for example, asking what exactly it was that Karis said — that we must be ready for dialogue with Russia. And indeed, we must be ready. By the way, we currently have dialogue: we have an embassy in Moscow, the Russians have an embassy here, people cross the border, tens of thousands of Estonians visit St. Petersburg — we do have dialogue!

Vilja Kiisler: As for the presidential election, the president is elected by the current Riigikogu, and indeed the Reform Party has a so-called blocking majority there, as Sven Mikser put it. That means we don't have to imagine that the president could be elected by opposition parties or by those we imagine forming the next government and whose ratings are high.

The Reform Party's reactions at present don't reflect that Karis would necessarily be re-elected. But I also don't see the Reform Party having a plan for alternative candidates. And if no new candidates emerge, then Karis actually has a chance of being re-elected simply because someone has to be elected — and no one wants a situation where, after the electoral college, when things return to the Riigikogu, it still can't…

I'll end with a simple yes-or-no question: will Karis get a second term?

Indrek Kiisler: I can't say. I'll answer it this way: the political forces that formed the government in 2023 have an absolute majority in the Riigikogu — please, go ahead and elect him! You have over 68 seats. But because they're unable to do it — everything has fallen apart, even Reform Party members no longer trust one another — there's this drifting narrative that Karis somehow isn't suitable.

Vilja Kiisler: But he suits you! I understand —

Vilja, from you: yes or no? Very quickly, we have to wrap up!

Vilja Kiisler: He might be elected; it could happen, but in my view it wouldn't be a good solution.

Indrek Kiisler: By the way, Kersti Kaljulaid suits me very well too.

--

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