Should Estonians listen to Paavo Lipponen?

Giustino asks in the comments re Paavo Lipponen's take on Estonian foreign policy:

Should we in Estonia listen to his opinions or is he basically useless?

In my opinion everyone should listen to Lipponen; he's grouchy, thin-skinned, and opinionated to a degree that makes much of what he writes or says rather entertaining. I just hope that he takes offense to Estonian criticism and fires back, because no one issues a rejoinder quite like Paavo Lipponen. So if you like colorful denunciations, he's far from useless.

Another question is whether Lipponen knows what he's talking about. He's generally pro-NATO - when there isn't an election campaign going on, that is - and very pro-EU. The latter trait was a prominent feature of his prime ministership. He has a fairly good reputation for his handling of international issues, but that was built more on supposed negotiating prowess than any special foreign policy insight.

But really, the main thing here is that what we need is a proper row between Lipponen and Estonians. If I may make a recommendation, Estonians should say something like, "Now I see the Finnish media had Lipponen's number all along." (Lipponen hates large segments of the Finnish media.) If that fails to get a rise, I'd go with "With comments like that, no wonder Finnish voters opted for Anneli Jäätteenmäki." (Lipponen really, really hates Jäätteenmäki.)

Talks on Russian airspace violations

Hey, it can't hurt, can it?

Ilkka Kanerva (cons), the Finnish foreign minister, told reporters in Brussels on Wednesday that Finland had offered to host talks between Estonia, Finland and Russia aimed at preventing violations of Estonian and Finnish airspace by Russian military aircraft.

Mr Kanerva added the initiative to launch the talks had come from Russia.

The talks are initially scheduled to begin in November.

According to the Defense News, an Estonian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said that the country has agreed "in principle to hold talks at the level of specialists". The article also notes that after Finland and Russia held bilateral talks, the violations stopped for a couple of years, right up to last month's incident.

Getting down at the Finno-Ugric festival

Helsingin Sanomat has gotten hold of the schedule (fi) for President Tarja Halonen's trip to the Finno-Ugric festival in Saransk. There will be a bilateral meeting with Putin, during which the dark lord will presumably try to bend our Tarja to his will; a dinner; the opening of a new theater; and, of course, the festival - featuring a handicrafts exhibition and a folk dress demonstration. In the evening a helicopter will take three leaders to visit a school and a cultural center in the village of Staraja Terizm. Party on, I say.

Alas, everyone isn't quite as placid. Re the guest list issue, previously addressed here, euro|topics provides a partial translation of an article (hu) by Gyula Máté:

This summit has little to do with the aspects historians, ethnologists and Finno-Ugrics find interesting because the current Hungarian head of government is about as interested in the Finno-Ugric past as Putin is - namely not at all. By excluding Estonia from this summit Russia wants to demonstrate that it has the power to isolate the Estonians from their 'historical' partners... Hungary is economically dependent on Russia. The summit in Saransk highlights the dilemma of Hungarian foreign policy: How can we move closer to Russia without harming our Euro-Atlantic integration?

It's true that the meeting has little to do with the aspects historians and ethnologists find interesting. It's not a meeting of historians or ethnologists, after all, but of political leaders who have current political issues to discuss. The meeting has to do with bilateral relations and, we can hope, the living conditions of Finno-Ugric peoples in Russia. I'm not sure why this should be considered a strike against it.

For another thing, I'm still not quite clear on how the meeting is supposed to isolate the Estonians. Finnish leaders meet with Estonians all the time and will continue to do so. What sort of isolation is that? If a Finno-Ugric summit between Hungary, Finland, and Estonia is needed - is it? - arranging one won't require Russia's permission. This meeting obviously won't function as one and isn't intended to do so.

Mihkelson's wedge

Marko Mihkelson, a conservative Estonian parliamentarian, has commented on President Tarja Halonen's upcoming visit to a Finno-Ugric folklore festival in Russia.

"The fact that the Russian president has invited the Finnish head of state and Hungarian prime minister, but not the Estonian head of state, to a Finno-Ugric festival in the Mordovian republic next week should be a clear signal to our partners in the European Union to turn down the invitation," Mr Mihkelson wrote in his blog, according to [the Baltic News Service].

Mr Mihkelson feels the Finnish and Hungarian leaders would undermine EU solidarity if they attended without the Estonian president.

"The Russian president has of course purposely left the Estonian president out of the list of invitees to see whether a wedge could be driven between Finland and Hungary and Tallinn."

The blog article is here in its entirety (ee). I don't understand Estonian with any reliability, so I'll comment only on the translated bits and pieces.

Undoubtedly Russia treats Finnish leaders differently than Estonian leaders and this festival invite is yet another sign of it. Nevertheless, it's difficult to see how the visit hurts Estonia. Consider what will happen. Will Halonen and Putin put out a joint statement to the effect that Estonians should never have moved that damn statue? Hardly. Will Halonen promise to support Russia against Estonia's interests inside the EU? I consider it unlikely. Halonen and Putin will probably discuss some bilateral issues between Finland and Russia. Halonen will say something suitably considered to express her concern over the treatment of Finno-Ugric minorities in Russia and Putin will give a bland response. The only effect all of it will have is that maybe, if we're lucky, the Mordvins and Mari will feel like they have friends abroad - friends who can't do much of anything to help them, but friends nevertheless.

As for EU solidarity, my understanding of the concept is that it's supposed to mainly apply in EU decision making, not in the bilateral relations between members and non-members. It can't really mean that if one EU country has poor relations with some country outside the EU, everyone is supposed to follow suit. To pick a hypothetical example, let's say that some leftist foreign minister with a peace sign on his lapel and a scraggly beard offends the Americans so that they refuse to have high level meetings with said lefty's bosses. Does that mean that Estonian leaders should refrain from meeting with Americans? I don't think so. You might argue that this is different because in some sense the Estonians should have been invited to tag along, but as far as I can see, there isn't a practical difference between attending this festival and any old meeting.

Direct challenge to Russian democracy

Giustino at Itching for Eestimaa wonders, "The Finnish example certainly poses a direct challenge to Russian democracy, yet for whatever reason the Russians choose to ignore it [...] So it interests me why Finland is continuously ignored from the man on the Russian street, while Estonia is paid attention."

I'll speculate.

Differences between Finnish and Russian economies can be explained as being the result of the Soviet period. While Soviet Russia and Soviet Estonia weren't identical, the real point of divergence between the countries didn't come until, to quote Vladimir Putin, "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century", the collapse of the Soviet Union. A common justification for Putin's repressive policies is that the Western-backed liberalization of the 1990s was a failure. The Estonian example challenges that account. It suggests that maybe the problem wasn't the policies per se, but the horribly corrupt way in which Russian politicians and officials implemented them.

I think a number of other reasons contribute to the difference in Russian attitudes on Finland and Estonia. Some of the causes of conflict between Russia and Estonia don't exist in the case of Finland. The Russian-speaking minority in Finland is much smaller and not inclined, as far as I can tell, to riot. Finland doesn't belong to NATO, which greatly lessens the military threat from this direction. Also, there are historical reasons for why Russians may view Estonia as a part of their "near abroad" and Finland as a part of the West. Finland hasn't been a part of the same state as Russia since 1917, whereas Estonia freed itself in 1991. That's a gap of 74 during which the Russians have gotten used to Finland being very different than the society in which they live.

PS: Max Jakobson's take on Russia is worth reading, as usual.

Tattletales for totalitarianism

Aapo writes about Culture Minister Stefan Wallin professing ignorance of author and translator Matti Rossi's past as an informant. Ben Zyskowicz, an influential National Coalition Party MP who has been fighting the good fight against domestic communists since the 1970s, has taken issue (fi) with Rossi receiving a state literary prize for translators because Rossi had reported Hungarian author Dénes Kiss's low opinion of communism to the Hungarian authorities in 1975.

(As terrible as Rossi's act was, I have to disagree with Zyskowicz. Rossi got the prize for, among other works, translating Shakespeare into Finnish. Even state literary prizes should be about literary merit, not whether a prospective recipient did something disgusting in the 1970s.)

Rossi's stunt reminded me of an anecdote that deserves repeating from Vaarallinen Suomi - Suomi Eestin Kommunistisen Puoleen ja Neuvosto-Viron KGB:n silmin ("Dangerous Finland - Finland in the Eyes of the Communist Party of Estonia and Soviet Estonia's KGB") by Mati Graf and Heikki Roiko-Jokela. In a memo to Soviet Union's and Soviet Estonia's foreign ministries, one P. Mozhajev of the Soviet Union's main consulate in Turku wrote:

R. Nummelin turned to the main consulate and said that the members of tourist group 5-46701, while staying in Tallinn from August 7th to August 10th 1984, were puzzled by the behaviour of Estonian guide Sirje (he couldn't remember the last name). According to Nummelin, the guide repeatedly criticized repeatedly the level of Russian culture, the quality of Soviet goods, she also presented single thoughts in favor of founding an 'independent bourgeois republic'. To Nummelin's and his wife's, who were both members of [the communist] Finnish People's Democratic League, attempts to make counterarguments and prove to the guide she was wrong, she answered pointedly.

The authors found the guide, Sirje Rumvolt, who said that while discussing the differences between Estonian and Finnish squirrels, she had told a joke, "Question: what are lizards? Answer: crocodiles under socialism." She said to the Finnish tourists that maybe the squirrels have poor fur because of socialist conditions. "Later this answer probably turned into an argument for founding an independent Estonia."

I wonder if people like Rossi and Nummelin ever considered what their actions said about the regimes they supported. Imagine the reverse situation: A Finnish communist author travels to 1970s Hungary and makes comments disparaging capitalism. A Hungarian capitalist - just go with it - hears his comments and reports him to the Finnish consulate, expecting them to... do what? That difference should have given pause even to a committed communist.

Putin's stab in the dark

The BBC quotes Russian President Vladimir Putin as saying, "They (Estonian police) didn't just disperse demonstrators. They killed one demonstrator. We demand that the criminals be brought to account."

It's an extraordinary assertion and one for which no evidence has been presented to the best of my knowledge. To the contrary, it was widely reported the man died of a stab-wound, which is hardly consistent with the theory that he was killed by the police. No one, least of all a person in Putin's position, should make such unsupported accusations at a time when tensions are still running high.

Here's what the victim's mother had to say:

At the funeral in Mustvee yesterday of Dmitri Ganin (20), the man stabbed to death during last week’s riots in Tallinn, the mother of the late Mr Ganin made a plea to the Russian Consul, members of Nochnoi Dozor, Russian TV-stations, and those present at the funeral not to use her son's death for propaganda purposes.

No sale with Vladimir, I guess.

Bronze Soldier polls

I know I've posted a lot on the Estonian statue controversy, but I'm a sucker for polls, so here we go again.

In a recent poll (fi), 54 percent of Russians supported economic sanctions against Estonia and 74 percent considered Estonia a hostile nation. However, only seven percent agreed that Estonian authorities were supporting fascism. Considering how prominent that theme is in the comments from Russian politicians, the number can be considered quite low. One percent supported war against Estonia and four percent wanted to close the Russian-Estonian border, so I guess that's something.

In Finland, public opinion is just the opposite. The Finnish Broadcasting Company (YLE) released a poll (fi) according to which a majestic four percent of Finns think Russia has acted correctly in the statue controversy. 73 percent disagree with Russia's actions and 24 percent don't have an opinion. With regard to Estonia, 51 percent think Estonia has acted correctly, 23 percent disagree, and 27 percent can't say.

Of special interest to political junkies are the party figures (fi). National Coalition Party supporters most clearly side with Estonia, Left Alliance supporters are more critical of both Russia and Estonia than average whereas Social Democratic Party supporters are more positive, and Centre Party voters pretty much reproduce the national average.

The Lavrov letter in full

Yesterday I wrote about a letter sent by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to several EU countries, including Finland, at the height of the Estonian statue controversy. Tampere newspaper Aamulehti has now published it (fi) - i.e. the version that originally appeared in Eesti Paevaleht. The Baltic Times and the Finnish News Agency (STT) carry some quotes in English, but as I have been unable to find a complete English translation on the Web, I thought I'd provide one:

I turn to you on the basis of the worrying development regarding the Liberator-soldier memorial. Its effects can reach further than the relations between Russia and Estonia.

The situation in Tallinn is about to come to a very bad turn. The police breaks up demonstrations by those who have protected the monument. Due to excessive use of force by Estonian authorities, tens of civilians have been hurt. One Russia citizen, a permanent resident of Estonia, has died. The society is disintegrating.

We asked Estonian officials repeatedly that they would take no steps to remove the monument and would not remove the remains of Soviet soldiers. Those soldiers gave their lives to liberate the world from fascism. Similar appeals were made to Estonian authorities also by the relatives of the soldiers buried near the monument. Regrettably Tallinn did not listen to these appeals.

It is our opinion, that Estonia's sacrilege and glaring acts pose a challenge to the whole world's democratic community, undermine the basis of humanism and morality, and defy all values on which the modern way of life is founded.

Similarly deeply worrying is the fact that a whole group of countries that are proud of their own democracy and tolerance treat positively the Estonian authorities' actions, understanding the current situation primarily as a factor in bilateral relations. They have given their silent approval to the interpretation that by equaling the heroic acts of the liberator-soldiers and the crimes of Nazis and their henchmen, the Estonian authorities try to rewrite history and reevaluate the role of the anti-Hitler coalition in the victory over fascism in the Second World War.

History teaches us that allowing the presentation of neo-Nazi feelings in certain countries can turn into a global tragedy. Regardless of what sort of evaluations of history this or that politician gives, or what sort of quarrels historians have, the memory of the fallen is sacred. Even more - heroes that gave their lives for the happiness and freedom of future generations can't be the victims of political games. It is our duty to defend those who can no longer defend themselves from all sorts of gravediggers.

We expect that especially Estonia's partners in Europe and in transatlantic organizations, as well as in the European Council and OSCE, give an appropriate assessment on the Estonian authorities' activity.

Russia, which has paid a terrible price for the victory over fascism, can't remain indifferent to development in which sacred historical memory is taken as hostage by current political demands. The events in Tallinn have started severe waves of protest and have been condemned at all levels of the Russian society, and it can influence our relations with the European Union and NATO in the most serious way.

I believe that the European Union will turn to the means at its disposal to convince Tallinn that the injustice committed by Estonian authorities should be stopped.

Keep in mind that the contents have been translated several times over, so arguments relying on exact wording should probably be avoided. The general meaning of the letter should come through, I hope. The bit about countries giving their "silent approval" for an "interpretation" that Estonians are revisionists is just as illogical in the Aamulehti version.

If the letter had been written by a blogger, it would be easy to dismiss as an ill-informed rant. Coming from the foreign minister of a powerful country, it's quite worrisome. I can't imagine that it was meant to convince recipients of the righteousness of Russia's cause. Maybe it was intended to keep them silent, lest they find themselves at the receiving end of a similar barrage. This time the toxic language can't be explained by saying that it was intended for domestic consumption, because the letter was sent to foreign governments and was not made public by Russia.

They get letters

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has sent a letter to Finnish Foreign Minister Ilkka Kanerva re the Estonian statue brouhaha. Hans Schumacher, the German ambassador to Finland, characterized the contents of said letter as "rather stern".

Before you read too much into it, be advised that the same letter was also sent to a bunch of other EU countries, including Germany and France. It was not, I think we can safely conclude, inspired by anything Kanerva has said.

There's no word on just how harsh Kanerva considered the letter's wording to be, but he did describe it thusly:

Mr Kanerva told STT that the letter mostly contained an account of how Russia had experienced the row with Estonia over the moving of a Soviet war memorial in Tallinn. Mr Lavrov also hoped in the letter that EU foreign ministers could make Russia's views known in Tallinn.

Mr Kanerva added the letter did not contain anything else of importance.

So apparently Lavrov didn't suggest military consultations, which is always a plus.

Update: Estonian daily Eesti Paevaleht got hold of the letter and published it. Quotes are available here. I'll comment more later.

I hate Moscow Oblast Nashis

So... a "pro-Kremlin youth group" called Nashi continue to carry out some sort of quasi-siege of the Estonian embassy, try to attack the Estonian ambassador to Russia at a press conference but get maced for their troubles, and damage the car of the Swedish ambassador to Russia for having the temerity to try to visit the Estonian embassy.

This is pretty worrying behaviour, I would say. The European Union has "strongly urged" Russia to protect the immunity of the diplomats. Russian cops seemed quite effective in breaking up an opposition rally in St Petersburg a short while ago. One wonders why they can't seem to bring this youth group under any sort of control. If one were cynical, one could arrive at the conclusion that they don't want to.

Russia is also thinking about various means to put economic pressure on Estonia. A boycott of Estonian products by individual consumers would be relatively benign, but "maintenance" on a railway grid putting a stop to oil deliveries to Estonia would be more serious.

Then there are the attacks on Estonian government websites. Estonia's Foreign Minister Urmas Paet said that some of them had come from Internet addresses registered to the Russian government. If Paet is correct, it raises the question of why Russia can't find competent 'Net hooligans.

On the Finnish front, President Tarja Halonen broke her silence on the matter. She pretty much repeated what Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen and Foreign Minister Ilkka Kanerva had already said, but it's still a welcome move.

Kanerva calls for solidarity with Estonia

In something of a change of course from the Finnish government's first take to the events in Estonia, Foreign Minister Ilkka Kanerva has approached (fi) Germany's Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier - Germany is currently holding the EU presidency - to call for EU countries to display solidarity with Estonia. Kanerva also said in a radio interview that it's important that EU countries express their clear support for Estonia. Previously Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen called on foreign countries not to get involved in Estonia's internal matter. I guess this settles the issue of whether "foreign countries" was an euphenism for "Russia". The new comment can still be seen as contradictory with the first reaction. I wonder if the Estonian government asked Finland to do it.

Update: Vanhanen wrote (fi) about the issue on his blog. He had a discussion with Estonia's Prime Minister Andrus Ansip on Saturday evening and describes the discussion as "warm and open". The blog entry also makes clear that his call for other countries not to get involved should be seen as a defense of Estonia's right to move the statue: "The location of a statue can not in itself be a human rights issue and the international community can't have any reason to interfere in the issue. This also goes for neighboring countries ... My statement has been read with satisfaction in Tallinn against the background that all multilateral organizations on our continent have been called for help against the decision to move of the statue and the Estonian government has been advised to enter into international dialog." From that perspective, a call for EU states to show solidarity with Estonia isn't all that incongruent.

Bringing out the dead

The Russian response to Estonia's decision to move the so-called Bronze Soldier, a statue depicting a Red Army soldier, and the remains of dead Red Army soldiers buried underneath from a busy city square to a quiet cemetery has been scarily over the top. There's the rioting in the streets of Tallinn, of course. Judging by the rioters' targets, Estonian shop windows are apparently the primary tools of oppression used by the fascist state. The reaction is understandable. I know that when anyone speaks ill of the dead, I smash up windows and steal everything I can to bring home the point the dearly departed should be respected. After all, what better way is there to show your respect for the dead than to help yourself to some free booze? It's what they would have wanted, I'm sure.

The rhetoric emanating from Moscow is almost as objectionable. The move is not "inhumane" or "blasphemy", as the Russian foreign minister claimed. It's not "barbaric", contrary to what the chairman of the international affairs committee in the lower house of the Russian parliament said. It doesn't justify calling the Estonian government "supporters of Nazism", like the chairman of the international affairs committee in the upper house of the Russian parliament did, nor does it make Estonian officials "provincial neo-Nazis", as they were described in a parliamentary resolution that passed unanimously. It doesn't amount to the "mockery of the dead and the victory in the Second World War".

The thing is, the Red Army occupied Estonia. It's damned difficult to be grateful to foreign occupiers, especially foreign occupiers that incorporate your country into their totalitarian dictatorship. Such an occupation, accompanied as it is with murders and deportations, is likely to create some hard feelings. I don't expect the Russians to adopt the Estonian point of view on the issue, but at the very least they could acknowledge that it exists. If they adjusted their analysis of Estonia's actions accordingly, maybe they wouldn't feel compelled to fling crude insults. It shouldn't be impossible to understand that from the Estonian perspective, moving a statue and the remains of dead soldiers that to a cemetery where those who want can go pay their respects isn't the most heinous act in the world.

On this side of the Gulf of Finland, Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen said (fi) that the matter was Estonia's internal affair and that foreign powers shouldn't get involved in it. Foreign Minister Ilkka Kanerva announced that he would be visiting Estonia next Wednesday. Presumably he won't be getting involved.