Estonian support

Estonia has been a member of NATO for nearly four years and supports granting Ukraine NATO’s Membership Action Plan at the upcoming summit in Bucharest. Can Russia somehow block the further enlargement of NATO? How do ordinary Estonians benefit from their country’s membership in NATO? These and other questions are raised in The Day ’s exclusive interview with Sven MIKSER, the chairman of Estonia’s Parliamentary Committee on Defense.

Did the Estonian government have any problems when your country was approving the decision to join NATO? It is no secret that a large Russian-speaking community lives in your country.

“I must say that the community very strongly supported our country’s accession to NATO. Certainly, support was stronger among the Estonian population than among the Russian-speaking one. But the main political parties actively supported the country’s membership in NATO. They had a consensus on reaching this goal. Therefore, I can say that we did not have any problems with Estonia’s membership in NATO. The problems were mainly about implementing legislative reforms. We had to implement a defense reform as well as a reform of the budgeting process. I can say that in general this was a rather calm process. The change of government did not interrupt this work. This can be explained by the fact that there was no divergence regarding the necessity to implement the above-mentioned reforms between the coalition and the opposition.”

But your country did not hold any referendum on NATO membership.

“The Constitution of Estonia does not allow putting questions of national security to a referendum. But even if a referendum on NATO membership had been held, the overwhelming majority of citizens would have supported it. This is explained by the fact that society’s support for NATO membership has always been higher than support for Estonian’s membership in the EU. I am 100 percent sure that even today the majority of Estonians would support the country’s membership in the North Atlantic Alliance.”

You are probably aware of the situation in Ukraine, where the ruling coalition supports joining the Membership Action Plan at the summit in Bucharest, while the opposition is demanding a referendum on this question. Based on your country’s experience, do you think our country needs the MAP at the moment or can it wait?

“First of all, I must note that it is the sovereign right of a country to decide whether to become a member of NATO or not. Some European countries neighboring on Estonia, for example, Finland and Sweden, have decided to remain outside of NATO for their own reasons. We in Estonia support every country’s sovereign decision. We are here in Ukraine not to exert pressure on anybody. We don’t force our neighbors to approve a decision on joining NATO. Since the decision has been approved in Ukraine, we will be glad to share our experience and ideas and to help however we can. This is our message.

“Ukraine’s current political leadership has expressed its wish to receive an invitation to join the MAP. We are aware of this wish and we support it. We will support it at the summit in Bucharest. I hope that this wish is realized at the summit. Obviously, this decision will be made by NATO member countries, but the Ukrainian leadership should pay attention to whether the consensus among the political forces and the population is sufficient to turn the MAP into full-fledged membership in NATO. I want to stress again that this will be a sovereign decision of the Ukrainian people.”

Why does Estonia support giving the MAP to Ukraine already in Bucharest?

“We consider that granting the MAP will be a strong message for Ukraine as well as Georgia. We know that there are differing opinions among NATO member countries on this question. Some NATO countries, like the US, are bringing very energetic support for giving the MAP to Ukraine. Some countries are more skeptical about this. But I hope that a consensus will be reached in Bucharest and that all the countries will understand that a positive signal is needed.”

Can you specify how ordinary Estonians benefit from their country’s membership in NATO?

“I think that each Estonian has grown more confident about his country’s future security. NATO membership has been very positive for economic development and investments, the country’s integration into Western structures as well as for the security structure. Membership in this military alliance boosts investor confidence. In addition, our defense sector has received a lot of valuable experience and expertise. We have also gotten an opportunity to take direct part in the process of approving decisions taken within NATO. I want to remind you that Estonia is a very small country and it makes up a very small part of the total amount of armed forces of NATO member countries. Along with that, NATO acts according to rules of consensus. Now we have a better position because our voice can be heard on any political questions. Our opinion is heard when consensus is needed within NATO. Clearly, NATO operations in Afghanistan and Kosovo are of top priority for our government in the sphere of defense and security.”

What is your attitude to the opinions of some German experts who say that accession to NATO should not be a top priority for Ukraine because to join the EU it is not necessary to join NATO first? Is this opinion shared by your country?

“There are indeed a small number of EU member countries that are not members of NATO. These are Austria, Finland, Sweden, and Ireland; and vice versa: Iceland and Norway are members of NATO without being part of the European Union. But most countries are members of both organizations at the same time. Therefore, I think that one should not put the question this way: linking NATO to EU membership. It is Ukraine’s sovereign right to join one organization or the other. And I consider that it would be correct for Ukraine to ask for membership in both of these organizations. I cannot say that they exclude each other; on the contrary, membership in each of them is mutually strengthened because these organizations have different goals, and they act according to different principles and in different spheres. If Ukraine wants to join both of these organizations, we will actively support it.”

You have said that Estonia could share its experience of Euro-Atlantic integration. What experience is your country already sharing or ready to share with Ukraine?

“The question is obviously about technical things, in the first place. For example, it could be our experience of drafting legislation or implementing defense reforms, defense planning, and drafting budgets for defense reforms. I would say that defense planning and defense expenditures are important aspects. One must also be ready to implement reforms according to promises that have been given. I would like to note that NATO does not ask Estonia to give certain defense capacities that are very much needed by the Alliance. NATO member countries want to be sure: if Estonia promises anything, they can be sure that our country, no matter how tiny its contribution to NATO operations is, will fulfill its obligations. I think that fulfillment of undertaken obligations is the most important aspect of NATO’s activity.”

In your opinion, what is Russia’s influence on NATO’s future enlargement, and will Moscow be able to prevent Ukraine and Georgia from receiving invitations to join the MAP at the summit in Bucharest?

“Russia has stated clearly that it will not be pleased if the countries of the former socialist camp join NATO. It was this way when Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic received invitations to join NATO in 1997. It was the same way when other countries of Central- Eastern Europe, including the Baltic countries, received invitations to join NATO in Prague in 2002. The Russians have always been unwilling to accept NATO’s enlargement. Furthermore, Russia, in my opinion, has understood that it is not in a position to block NATO’s decisions. This is a completely internal question for NATO to invite countries that are eager to join the Alliance. It is also a country’s sovereign decision whether to apply for membership in NATO. It is completely apparent that Russia would like to impede the organization’s next enlargement. One example of its opposition is the announcement by Moscow of a moratorium on the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) as well as its violations of other questions concerning weapons’ control.

“In the case of Georgia, Moscow supports the separatist regimes. The Russians are thus trying to find various reasons for placing obstacles in the way of neighboring countries. Sometimes they connect things that are not interrelated. Examples of this were the attempts to reach package agreements with some NATO member countries to postpone the entry of the Central-Eastern European countries. I think that we should clearly state — as we have successfully done before — that Russia does not have any formal right to speak about decisions linked to NATO enlargement.”

Finally, I would like to hear your prediction concerning the result of the NATO summit in Bucharest. Will Ukraine be invited to join the MAP?

“I cannot fully guarantee this because this decision is approved by consensus. We know that there are skeptics among our NATO allies. But I have enough grounds to hope that such a decision will be approved. I can see active work being carried out by our friends and allies, who want Ukraine to receive an invitation to join the MAP.”