An ERR photographer caught you in the middle of a staring contest with EKRE leader Martin Helme (see article picture – ed.). What were you discussing or arguing about?

We were discussing the claims he made on his radio show and the accusations against me which are completely baseless.

Therefore, the party leader is accusing you of organizing a coup without grounds?

How can we even be talking about a coup in a situation where EKRE elects a chairman at its congress every year? It's completely natural to have more than one candidate. Accusing me of trying to orchestrate a coup in this light is completely absurd. The more candidates, the better. It is a sign of in-house democracy, and efforts to snuff out the latter show that things are bad indeed.

Do you endorse Silver Kuusik for EKRE chair?

Yes. I have always stood by Martin Helme, but the serious mistakes and tactical missteps that have seen our rating plummet... In a situation where the government is doing everything in its power to destroy the Estonian economy and the prosperity of its people, EKRE's rating should be soaring, while it's actually going down. It is the result of a long process and a series of poor decisions. We also saw at European elections how our campaign missed the mark, was not carried out properly, and we had to settle for a single mandate. Therefore, considering moods in the party and serious shortcomings in terms of internal democracy, it's time to decide whether the current chairman should continue. Because his recent results are less than stellar, I believe it is time for a change.

And Martin Helme interprets your support for Kuusik as a putsch against him?

It is completely absurd. Elections are not a putsch. Elections are not a coup that one needs to suppress by throwing around panicked accusations and lies. Elections are a part of democracy. It is hardly normal when having an opposing candidate incudes panic. We might as well describe Riigikogu elections or other parties' in-house elections as putsches too then.

Is this what you were trying to explain to Martin Helme at the election party?

Yes, of course. I said that his idea of friends and foes is way off. I've told him before that he must not see these things in this light. That every person has their own opinion and should be able to speak it without fearing repercussions. He found that ours is a presidential party, and that he decides as chairman etc. I disagree and find that every democratic party also needs to have internal democracy, that decisions need to be made collegially and following discussions. That would be the normal state of affairs.

Why does he believe any move against him and proposal for change amounts to a putsch attempt?

Hard to say. But I would like to emphasize that none of this is aimed against Helme. What this is about is making EKRE more functional, democratic, broaden the decision-making process, discuss our tactics and strategy and lay them down for longer etc. It all serves the purpose of making EKRE stronger, better and – chiefly – to land it in a government instead of staying perpetually in the opposition where we cannot promote our goals and ideology in any meaningful way. That is the goal here, it's not just a power grab.

Martin Helme has maintained that EKRE will not abandon its principles for a place in a coalition, and that efforts to dial down aggressiveness would amount to a white flag.

It is a completely misguided view and has more to do with reinforcing his own position inside the party, claiming that he has never done wrong. Changing our tone would not amount to abandoning our principles or ideals. I firmly believe that national conservatives especially need to remain dignified and balanced in any situation. We know from polls that this matters to a lot of our members and voters, people who say that they would support EKRE but cannot for various reasons. Making these changes will only lend EKRE strength, broaden our supporter base and allow us to represent our voters and Estonia. Unfortunately, it has been turned upside down to suggest EKRE would disappear. EKRE would not disappear and the party would be much stronger than it is today.

Parties tend to grapple with in-house tensions from time to time, which has also led to some members quitting. How has EKRE managed to go so long without a prominent internal conflict? Or have such things happened in the past?

EKRE has indeed been something of an exception in terms of major infighting. We are primarily based on ideology and people come to us to support the national conservative worldview, instead of trying to get a piece of the pie. Unfortunately, I'm forced to admit that the situation has deteriorated over the past year especially. And the party leader making such a statement on election day hurt my election result in no uncertain terms. It would have been considerably better otherwise. It is unprecedented for the EKRE leader to suggest that people who want EKRE to do well are looking to destroy the party instead and to personally undermine our election result. I find it completely unexampled.

You mentioned poor decisions. What might be some examples?

It's a rather long list by now. We cannot say that all decisions have been wrong. Martin Helme has made a lot of good decisions. Without going into specifics, the problem is that while the EKRE statutes provide that the board makes the decisions which the chairman executes, the reality today is that decisions are often made by the party chairman alone, which I do not consider to be right.

Some EKRE politicians have expressed less than clear positions on Russia's war in Ukraine, in terms of who should win, how much aid should Ukraine be given and who started the war in the first place.

Personally, I do not understand these positions. It is clear beyond doubt in my mind. Russia is responsible for starting this war of aggression and I'm unequivocally rooting for Ukraine. It could be no other way because it is clear that should Russia win, its gaze will turn to us next. And appeasement a la [Konstantin] Päts out of fear of angering Russia would make no difference whatsoever. Russia will attack us when it wants to attack us, and nothing we do here can change that. So we absolutely must support Ukraine and I sincerely hope they will win this war.

Former EKRE member Peeter Ernits wrote in an Eesti Päevaleht opinion piece that [former EKRE leader] Mart Helme allegedly said that Russia is waging a holy war in Ukraine which he supports. I quote: "EKRE members told me how during the same meeting where it was suggested there is a putsch attempt, the board was also treated to a statement by Mart Helme in which he said that Russia is waging a holy war which he supports. Members of the board were visibly irritated and tried to call the deputy chairman to order."

Unfortunately, it is true.

It's true?

It is.

Based on what do you say so?

I was there for it. Mart said it during a board meeting, so plenty of people heard it.

Sounds incredible.

Indeed it does.

Did you ask Mart Helme about his position and did he elaborate?

He did not elaborate further.

How did the debate end?

It came as a shock to everyone present.

But how was it wrapped up?

It wasn't. It was left hanging in the air. But neither I nor other members of the board can stand for such a statement.

How many supporters does Silver Kuusik have? Who else is in his corner?

Kuusik is backed by a lot of EKRE members who feel that we should take the party forward instead of painting ourselves into a corner and remaining sitting in the opposition slinging mud at everyone else. We need to do everything in our power to get more supporters and to become party to a government while holding on to our ideals and principles. There are quite a few people who are worried about the situation as it is today. But I cannot say how the vote might go, especially if Kuusik will not be allowed to present his platforms to members of the party before the congress.

--

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