"I believe that in this situation, it would have been wiser for Estonia not to participate in voting," said Reinsalu, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Riigikogu.  "And that would have been an understandable position, considering that some Nordic countries as well as Germany also did the same. There's no question here."

With a vote of 124-14 and 43 abstentions, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) on Wednesday passed a resolution demanding an end to Israel's occupation of Palestine within the next twelve months. Within the region, while Lithuania and Sweden abstained from the vote, Estonia was among those to vote in favor of the resolution, alongside Latvia and Finland.

Reinsalu, himself a former foreign minister, said that he considers a shift like this on these issues to be unreasonable. "It is the responsibility of the foreign minister to issue these guidelines," he stressed. "I would have expected a more mature response."

He noted that Estonia's vote has an impact on its alliances as well.

"Everything has an impact," he said. "This step will surely be viewed in a positive light by Arab countries and a slew of countries around the world. For the United States, it's definitely a signal with a more negative meaning. Of course, it won't fundamentally change Estonia's foreign policy; it's first and foremost a strategic indicator issue for those of us considering these matters from a distance. But I am almost certain that the U.S. would have preferred to see that European countries and Estonia didn't support this. There's no doubt about that."

According to the Isamaa chair, this shift in Estonia's foreign policy stance on the Palestine issue could logically end up leading to Estonia eventually recognizing Palestine as a state.

"Step by step distancing [ourselves] from [our] previous position, if there is a conceptual starting point behind it, could inherently lead to that," he noted. "I don't have any information that the government has made such a decision. I would urge extreme caution in doing so. But what's clear is that if you're already going to adopt a position under such logic, then it should ultimately lead to that outcome."

Reinsalu noted that the shifting of Estonia's views on the Palestine issue began with former prime minister Kaja Kallas' bid for the position of EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy.

"This is intrinsically related to what concerned the shift in Estonia's position this spring," he said. "Ahead of the UN vote this spring, Kaja Kallas even called around the Baltic Sea countries, urging them to support the Palestinian state resolution. And I think that behind it was above all a pragmatic approach."

The Isamaa chair said nominations were underway for the high representative post at the time, and in the case of the Renew Europe bloc, or the liberal bloc, the French president's stance was crucial.

"I don't have the information, but logically speaking, it could have been a request from the French president to push the Baltic Sea countries toward a more pro-Arab stance as well," he said. "So this could be part of the shift in approach that started back then."

This May, Estonia likewise voted in favor of a resolution at the UNGA in New York upgrading Palestine's rights at the UN as an observer state and urging the UN Security Council (UNSC) to favorably consider Palestine's full membership in the organization. The EU was similarly split in that vote as well, with 14 states in favor, two against and 11 abstentions.

Kaljulaid: Estonia votes based on international law

According to MP Raimond Kaljulaid (SDE), a member of the National Defense Committee of the Riigikogu, Estonia as a small country must base its voting decisions on international law and pursue values-driven foreign policy.

"This sometimes leads to very difficult choices, where it may happen that some of our allies interpret the situation one way, while others interpret it another way," he acknowledged. "It is then the job of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Riigikogu's Foreign Affairs Committee to establish the framework based on which decisions are made."

He added that "Estonia nevertheless shapes its position based on how we interpret international law and the ideals expressed in it in this situation."

Kaljulaid emphasized that Estonia's position doesn't necessarily have to be to always vote in line with the EU, and, if the EU is split, to vote in line with the U.S.

"Of course Estonia's preference is always for the West to have as unified a position as possible when it comes to such important landmark votes in the UN," he acknowledged. "But I disagree with the notion that we should have some sort of mechanical approach to voting – that we should in any case always vote the same as one country or another. Estonia is a member of the UN, and we are sovereign in shaping our positions."

If it happens that countries vote differently, it's also important that allies exchange info and explain why they adopted one stance and not another, Kaljulaid said.

"I don't see any major fundamental problem between countries in terms of this," he added.

--

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