The question of whether President Alar Karis will continue in office — often portrayed as a major mystery — seems simpler than we imagine. Already in the fall of 2025, in an interview with Mirko Ojakivi, he said that "it would take a small miracle to persuade me to run," but as we know, a similar miracle also occurred in August 2021.

Karis has not hidden the fact that all his previous candidacies have been successful, which requires not only strong personal conviction but also firm assurances from those on whom the success of his candidacy depends. So far, he has not been given such assurances, and the slight smile on his face suggests that while he could give his consent, continuing in office is not a matter of vital importance to him.

When the Riigikogu's Council of Elders sent Speaker Lauri Hussar (Eesti 200) to meet Karis to inquire about a possible second term, the public was left with vague explanations. But nothing clear could have been said, because evidently nothing was said in Kadriorg that would warrant headlines.

Everyone understands that this was merely diplomacy, because the Riigikogu has no intention of re-electing Karis. As Hussar himself admitted in an interview with ERR, only two parties have so far expressed support for Karis, meaning he could not be elected in parliament. Hussar himself surely understands that there is no point in expecting a definitive "yes" from Karis at this stage. It is therefore unclear why any answer is expected at all from the incumbent president.

What are you people doing?

Having followed Karis's public statements closely, one can, setting diplomacy aside, sense that Karis himself is in a waiting mode, thinking just one thing: "What are you people doing? Decide whether Estonia wants political infighting over new names, or whether I have been dignified enough to continue in this office."

The dignity of a president and the value of their term are not usually determined by isolated statements amplified by the media. Headlines can also distort the original message, creating impressions that are far from the truth. Yet Karis is readily dismissed, with critics pointing to some of his foreign policy positions and statements on Russia and Ukraine.

For example, Karis's interview with Helsingin Sanomat drew widespread criticism, as if he had said that once the war in Ukraine ends, "normal" dialogue with Russia should resume. In fact, he said that we must be prepared for such dialogue, but only after stopping the aggressor and reassessing relations.

Karis emphasized that "Russia must change in order for us to communicate with it." This means that negotiations would not be with a defeated Vladimir Putin, but with a Russia willing to genuinely engage, not merely pretend to do so. Karis has never said he would roll out the red carpet for Putin the day after the war ends. Extending this line of thought, it becomes clear that what Karis actually said matters less than how it reinforces a preconceived narrative of his failed foreign policy.

Theoretically possible, practically not

The first round of the 2026 presidential election is scheduled in the Riigikogu for September 2. A candidate needs 68 votes to be elected. That is not few, but not impossible either — if the parties are willing.

If Karis were the candidate, one could safely subtract the EKRE votes (nine votes), which support Mart Helme as president. Even then, there is much uncertainty, as it is unclear how MPs who have left their factions would vote. There are already 18 unaffiliated MPs, although most are still informally aligned with parties.

The Center Party (seven votes) and Isamaa (eight votes) have stated they are willing to support Karis, and they maintain that his re-election would not fail because of them. Thus, Karis's chances would depend primarily on the choices of Reform Party, Estonia 200, and the Social Democrats. Theoretically possible — but practically?

The largest faction in parliament is the Reform Party (37 votes), from which most criticism of Karis has come. Still, party leader Kristen Michal has not ruled him out entirely, saying in a Vikerraadio interview that both Karis and former president Kersti Kaljulaid have supporters within the party and "both have the potential to be President of the Republic of Estonia."

Michal also stated that Reform will not nominate its own candidate, meaning they are looking for a cross-party figure — which Karis would technically fit. Kaljulaid's name was likely floated more to create ambiguity than as a serious proposal.

Marko Mihkelson (Reform Party), one of Karis's most vocal critics, said carefully that "the future head of state should have strong international competence and the ability to represent Estonia visibly, memorably, and effectively."

There is no doubt that the next five years will be turbulent internationally, requiring a highly balanced and articulate figure to handle the pressure. From Estonia's perspective, the president's role is primarily diplomatic and has limited formal powers. From the outside, however, the role carries greater weight — a president is a president, and their words matter.

Among the Social Democrats (nine votes), there has been no clear indication of whom they would support. Former Mayor of Tallinn, Jevgeni Ossinovski has pointed to a lack of trust between parties as a key obstacle to a successful parliamentary election. Five years ago, the Social Democrats were willing to support Kersti Kaljulaid, but after that proved impossible, they quickly backed Karis. Now, even without direct criticism of him, they are not rushing to support him either.

Eesti 200 (13 votes) has also been noncommittal, saying they are considering "several candidates." Kristina Kallas recently stated that "a majority of our MPs do not support Alar Karis continuing." The detailed reasons have not been elaborated, but the expectation is for a president who embodies "the values our foreign policy has been based on since Lennart Meri."

From these statements, one can conclude only that Karis is seen as having been unsuccessful in foreign policy. Another party member commented slyly that in Toompea, there is even difficulty identifying noteworthy moments from Karis's term.

The more one speaks with MPs, the clearer it becomes that the issue is not individual statements but a perceived lack of bold ideas and personal traits that create the impression that Kadriorg looks down on Toompea — something parliament does not take kindly to.

Thus, there may be nothing seriously wrong with Karis, and the parties — Isamaa, the Center Party, Social Democrats, Eesti 200, and Reform — could agree that he has carried out the office with sufficient dignity. The votes might even be there if the political decision were made — but this time, it will not be.

Lessons from presidential elections

The autumn parliamentary session will be intense, as all political forces already have an eye on the 2027 parliamentary elections. For some parties, it is a matter of survival. The confusion surrounding the presidential election and the search for suitable candidates helps bring attention to parties and politicians who might otherwise be overlooked.

There are still just over three months until September, allowing ample time for discussions. However, caution is needed, as each new name raised creates public expectations that may be difficult to fulfill.

When candidates X, Y, and Z are proposed, the public wants to know their views on global issues. But public opinion is not what decides. The decision lies with party-affiliated MPs — or the electoral college if parliament fails.

Recall 2021, when President Kersti Kaljulaid was nearing the end of her term and parties were discussing candidates. Kaljulaid only announced in mid-August that she was willing to run again. Already in February, Kristina Kallas — then leader of the extra-parliamentary Eesti 200 — had suggested that parliament should re-elect Kaljulaid.

Parliamentary parties did not respond because real support was lacking. The reasons were largely the same as those now cited regarding Karis. Some confusion also stemmed from Kaljulaid's earlier attempt to become OECD Secretary-General — despite withdrawing her candidacy in early 2021, it lingered in memory.

The lesson from the past two presidential elections is that rushing to publicly nominate or support candidates can prevent them from gaining broad backing, forcing a search for alternatives. The same will likely happen again. Parties want to elect the president in parliament, if only they can find a candidate acceptable to all. Karis is not that candidate, but perhaps another name will be.

The truth is that for a successful parliamentary election, a candidate would need support not only from major parties but also from Isamaa, the Center Party, and independents. It is not easy, but not impossible. Everything depends on the candidate. Politicians note that if such a figure emerges, their name will likely be revealed only at the end of August. The next president will likely come closer to politics — more specifically, closer to foreign policy.

--

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