This July, Estonia and other NATO member states were assigned force capability goals based on NATO's new defense plans. Combined with its own national defense action plan, it's clear that Estonia needs to acquire additional new capabilities, Pevkur said.

"For example, we haven't currently needed to deal with chemical and biological weapons much within the Estonian Defense Forces (EDF)," he explained. "We've focused on the idea that, if necessary, we can share this [responsibility] with the Rescue Board. But we may need to create some sort of capability there, and there's a bunch more capabilities that I unfortunately truly cannot comment on. But the understanding is that these new capabilities also require additional money."

New plans have been made through the year 2044. Pevkur will present how the required funding will be spread over the years at Thursday's government meeting.

"[Financial needs] will fluctuate in the sense that more money will be needed some years, because, for example, we need to create some sort of capacity by 2039, but in order to exist in 2039, [we] need money in 2037," he explained. "And so that peak goes up. But on average, around 4 percent GDP may be the national defense spending needed for us to fulfill these NATO defense plans. If we wanted to get absolutely [everything] currently being proposed."

Giving an example, the minister noted that ideally, Estonia's defense plan should include helicopters. "But what we're actually seeing is that it's much more effective to use FPV drones and loitering [munitions] to achieve the same effect, which significantly changes that sum," he said.

If Estonia were to operate solely based on what has been initially outlined in NATO's new defense plan, however, that would mean that defense spending could rise to 5 percent GDP in the coming years.

"But if we wanted to follow only what was described, then I'd venture to guess – of course we don't know what the GDP will do, and there could be various changes in absolute numbers – that roughly 4.5-5 percent [GDP], within that range, is what long-term defense spending should be for us to have all the desired capabilities outlined in NATO's defense plans," Pevkur said.

This would mean a significant increase from the current 3 percent.

"It wouldn't be quite twice [as much], but ... if instead of 3 percent it's somewhere around 4.5-5 percent, then that is indeed about a one and a half times [increase]," he acknowledged.

In monetary terms, this means that if the state's defense spending this year totals €1.34 billion, then over the next 20 years, an additional €250-300 million a year would be needed to achieve these new goals.

"This is essential, so to speak," the defense minister said. "If we were to want the maximum, then we're actually talking about roughly half a billion euros more each year."

Defense committee chair: We don't have to buy it all ourselves

MP Kalev Stoicescu (Eesti 200), chair of the National Defense Committee of the Riigikogu, noted that when it comes to attack helicopters, for example, Estonia should take into account when planning the fact that Poland is buying around a hundred of them, and that Poland also has tanks.

"We should set clearer boundaries for ourselves regarding what our ambition is and what our capabilities are," Stoicescu said.

"We used to consider extravagant the purchasing of certain military capabilities that we have already acquired – such as medium-range air defense – and it just keeps getting more extravagant," he continued. "Let's not forget, we have 1.3 million people, and our GDP is slightly below the EU average. We're not a major power capable of [acquiring] all kinds of capabilities; soon we'll be talking fighter jets too. We have to increasingly share these. Allies have plenty of helicopters, and they could preposition them, bring them into the region. We don't have to do everything ourselves."

The committee chair noted that he takes every opportunity to remind people that national defense isn't just about ammunition, attack helicopters and so on.

"National defense is so much broader, and we see that in the National Defense Committee of the Riigikogu too," he said. "We talk about the civilian side; we also look at Ukraine. We see what civil protection means – all other civilian capabilities. ...And this is the mindset we need to proceed based on going forward – that we're investing not only in munitions and military capabilities, but also in the broad civilian component of national defense."

Stoicescu and Pevkur both agreed that strengthening air defense is critically important for Estonia.

"If you ask what exactly is needed in air defense or in the air defense system as a whole, then there is no question about the ultra short range, no question about the short range – in other words, up to six to seven kilometers we've got covered, with both Pioruns and Mistrals," the defense minister said.

"From there, we have medium-range air defense coming soon, based on the IRIS-T," he noted. "The shortfall, which is actually a big problem for everyone throughout NATO, is ballistic missile defense capability – that is, the capability to counter flying missiles at altitudes of up to 20 kilometers and distances of 150-200 kilometers."

--

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