In an interview given to Vikerraadio, the minister stressed that Americans are interested in protecting their investments, which among other things means Estonia must carefully consider how to manage the rare earth metals* concealed beneath the soils of northeastern Estonia.

The interview began with the potential deportation of illegal migrants from the U.S., and of Palestinians from Gaza.

What is your view of deportations?

It is a very bad thing.

If the U.S. were to ask Estonia to assist in deporting 1.8 million Palestinians to Egypt or Jordan, for example, should we help our allies out?

I can't even conceive of that in practical terms.

Why not?

I simply can't imagine how Estonia could go into some third country or territory and start relocating people somewhere. I simply cannot conceive of that.

Is it our duty as Estonians, as Europeans, to inform our ally that deportation is not okay?

We must take what Trump says seriously in terms of topics.

But life has shown that it is not worth interpreting and commenting on his every word, all the time. I was in the U.S. when he held that press conference with [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu. Yet already the next day, there were slightly softened statements coming.

In my opinion, we must take away from Trump's message that his and America's interests are in that region, they are aligned with Israel, and they want to achieve peace there.

These are far more important, much deeper, and very serious historical issues. And things have never happened in such a way that people are simply rounded up and told to live somewhere else.

Really? That has taken place many times through history.

Well, things have never stayed that way permanently. They have always led to other reactions.

Who should it be who informs Trump that deportation is not okay? Who should remind him of this, from time to time?

That is what the international community's role is. This is a rules-based world. That is what the United States has joined. I remind you that the 1945 UN Charter established the rules-based world order.

But today, those rules are being bent, and it is certainly not good for Estonia if they are changed. It is our collective responsibility to ensure that the multilateral world order, where even small states have the right to self-determination, remains intact.

Have we considered that if international law is no longer a small country's "nuclear weapon," what is ours?

Yet it must be. And our other "nuclear weapon" is actually alliances. For example, if we are talking about the U.S., at all meetings as far up as [U.S. diplomat and Donald Trump's special envoy to Ukraine and Russia] General [Keith] Kellogg, I heard only strong messages about Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland—this entire region. And also about NATO. These ties are very strong and stem from America's own interests

Even though America has adopted the slogan "America First," the actual world order also protects the interests of the U.S. itself.

And what if there is a conflict between these two principles? If our biggest ally no longer values international law or a rules-based world order, how should we act in that situation?

Well we must always act according to our own interests.

But which is more significant for our interests? Should we follow our largest ally into a world where the rules matter less? Or should we stick to these rules and insist, in every situation, that deportation is not okay?

These are not mutually exclusive things. Journalists tend to latch onto a word or phrase, provide their judgments, and label things.

My and the Estonian government's task is to ensure that we navigate through these complex situations unscathed. The world is not so black and white that it is either one way or the other.

We must base our actions on the Tartu Peace Treaty That treaty is our "birth certificate" and part of the existing world order. Even the U.S. does not disregard this order. President Trumpian rhetoric may be more brutal and direct, but in the end, we must judge by the actions, not the words.

How successful has Trump been in his foreign policy so far? For example, after imposing 25 percent tariffs, both Canada and Mexico immediately announced reinforcements on their borders. Various South American countries quickly agreed to take back their migrants, after brief phone calls. It seems that threats work if the one making them is big enough.

Whether Trump's foreign policy has been successful or not, we will only truly get to see in four or five years. Right now, it is too early to call. It is clear, however, that his negotiation tactic is to first hem in the other side completely, before starting talks.

The worst thing you can do with Trump is try to please him too much

Why is this bad?

This is something that high-ranking officials close to him have repeatedly told us in the U.S. His background and books show that Trump is a businessman—an aggressive negotiator. In his way of doing things, the other party must also place their demands firmly on the table.

When we come to talk about tariffs, let's be honest—the EU is also capable and willing to impose very high tariffs on the U.S. The American economy is deeply interconnected with Europe, and I believe the U.S. has no real interest in a tariff war. The only one who would truly benefit from that would be China.

Does the foreign ministry have a guide on how to understand what Trump really wants?

We have our experience. Plus I personally gained experience while serving as defense minister, during his first term. That experience tells us we must focus on our own interests.

The good thing is that we don't need to change anything with our foreign and security policy. We have always followed a consistent strategy, and Trump and his team understand very well what Estonia stands for and how we contribute. I can say with confidence that our relations with the U.S. are better than ever.

But still, if Trump says he wants to take over Greenland by force, what does he really mean by that?

When he comes to talk about Greenland, he is talking about the U.S.' geopolitical interests in that region. There are two reasons for that—jockeying with China and natural resources. Trump is talking about American interests.

For example, the U.S. has long been highly interested in Estonia's rare earth metals. Everyone knows that there is phosphorite in Ida-Viru County, and with that come rare earth metals, which would represent an enormous wealth source for the Estonian people.

Are we ready to have this debate? My question to the Estonian people and the Estonian government is: Are we ready to have this debate with a clear mind about how to extract these resources while protecting the environment? How do we attract large American investments to establish high-tech production here, replacing China's dominance in this field for both the U.S. and Europe?

This is a bold geopolitical decision that Estonia needs to make, and it would give us a very strong bargaining position in dealings with the Trump administration. It would place us firmly on the global map, making the U.S. highly interested in protecting its major investments and production capabilities here. This is a concrete example of realpolitik.

The U.S. wants Ukraine's rare earth metals — what can we offer? The U.S. administration has asked Ukraine to provide rare earth metals in exchange for aid. Have we considered that if the Americans one day ask what we can offer in return for their support, should we propose our peat bogs, pyrolysis technology, or let's say our linguistic corpus of four billion words? But it seems we already have an answer—we, too, can offer rare earth metals.

This is in our interest. This is not just about American interests—it is in our national interest. Besides the fact that Estonia is a border state with Russia, historically occupied and geographically in a difficult position, what do we have to offer? We can offer mutually beneficial economic relations that interest the U.S.

I know people who believe that Estonian companies should mine and refine rare earth metals themselves, create final products, and then sell them to the Americans.

Exactly so!

But you're talking about major investments. When I think of large Western corporations operating in the Third World, they open mines, extract resources, and process them elsewhere.

That is a colonial-era mentality. But that is not how things work anymore. We have moved far beyond those days. I want the debate in Estonia to be based on facts and arguments.

Yesterday, I met with the president of the Estonian Academy of Sciences and asked what they think about mineral resources. He, who was active in opposing phosphorite mining during the Soviet era, said that the main reason for that fight was the planned influx of 300,000 Soviet settlers—without asking the Estonian people.

Last year, Estonia joined the U.S.-led rare earth metals coalition, which establishes policies on how these resources should be processed locally to the greatest extent possible. It is not about simply extracting them and shipping them away for glass beads.

Have you recently discussed these resources with the Americans?

We have had discussions at an abstract level. First, we need to reach a domestic consensus in Estonia, develop a strategy, and ensure that this strategy maximizes local processing.

We ae talking about investments in the hundreds of millions, If not billions. When we talk about capital, we are talking about investments in the hundreds of millions—possibly even billions. This is where international capital inevitably comes into play, and with it, international interests.

Why American interests and not, for example, French interests?

Absolutely, the question is who makes the best offer. And I can bet that there will be a race. You see, my position is clear—we should not constantly approach these matters with a begging bowl. We have something to offer, and we can set our own terms based on our national interests.

But have you tried offering our pyrolysis tech?

No, I haven't tried offering pyrolysis technology. What I am saying is that Estonia has many things we can offer and things that are of interest. When it comes to rare earth metals, we have already secured a significant investment—a Canadian-backed rare earth magnet factory that is now operational in Ida-Viru County.

We have a practical role to play in the global economy

We are already a key player. And when these investments come, they will be protected.

Do you agree with [ICDS director] Kristi Raik when she says that values and rules no longer matter to the U.S., and that Estonia must adopt a more transactional approach with Trump?

I don't agree with the first part of Kristi Raik's argument—that values have disappeared. I just returned from the U.S., and I can say that values are still very much in place. Freedom is a core American value, and they understand very well that Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have fought for their freedom and will continue to do so.

But yes, practical interests bind us together more closely. Rare earth metals and other areas of cooperation strengthen our ties. These relationships are based on real businesses, investments, and mutual interests. At the end of the day, values may be weighed on a scale and assessed in a practical context.

Should Estonia prepare for a scenario in which the U.S. is no longer interested in supporting the Baltic states? We must be prepared for everything, but we must also work to ensure that our relationships continue to thrive. Meetings at the Senate and Congress, including discussions on security, foreign policy, and budget issues, show that financial support—bringing hundreds of millions into our defense—is likely to continue.

In your annual foreign policy speech in the Riigikogu, you said that now is the right time to discuss security guarantees for Ukraine. You stated that these guarantees "must be implemented immediately once combat ends, even if NATO membership takes time; they must include a promise to defend Ukraine if aggression occurs again, and their credibility must be ensured through real military capabilities."

Has there been discussion about whether Estonia is ready to defend Ukraine in case of renewed aggression and to put our troops on the ground there?

Yes, we have discussed it in the cabinet. Estonia must be at the table today when these potential security guarantees are being negotiated. Estonia has always participated in missions with allies that also ensure our own security.

Can you envision Estonia deploying troops to Ukraine?

Ukraine is a very existential issue for us, and I can certainly envision Estonia, together with allies, being present there in a well-planned manner.

What form would this take? A peacekeeping, or a military mission?

Right now, it is too early to discuss specifics, such as the number of troops or whether it would be a peacekeeping or military mission. But these debates are already taking place, and Estonia must be involved in them while ensuring our own defense capabilities.

So Estonia would be ready to defend Ukraine if aggression breaks out once again?

That is in our interest. But ultimately, according to Estonian law, this decision must be made by the Riigikogu.

Keith Kellogg wants to hear Europe's position now This is not a decision to be made a year, two, or five years from now. I understand that Keith Kellogg and other key figures in the U.S. want to hear what Europe thinks already now. These decisions will come relatively soon.

Right now, we do not yet see the key moment necessary to achieve peace. For that to happen, Putin's objectives must change. That is why in the U.S., we primarily discussed what steps are needed to corner Putin. These certainly include continued military aid, very strict energy and economic sanctions, and the third step—led by Estonia—utilizing Russia's frozen assets.

Who was it that once said that North Korea has been sanctioned so much that only potatoes can be sent there (referring to a comment by defense ministry secretary general Kusti Salm-ed.), yet the country's military capabilities still grow.

They simply have a lot of people under arms. But Russia's economy is not in good shape—it is under significant pressure. However, it is also true that last year, Russian gas exports to Europe actually increased, so there is still a lot of work to do.

Has the foreign ministry analyzed what went wrong? Why did the Biden administration classify Estonia as a "second-tier" country, restricting its access to advanced semiconductor technology? How is it that Spain or Italy is seen as more trustworthy than Estonia in the eyes of the U.S.?

It is very difficult to say what the Biden administration's reasoning was. Even Israel, which has been a highly trusted partner of the U.S., was placed in the same category as Estonia. However, this issue was one of the key topics in our meetings in the U.S., including discussions with Sen. Ted Cruz, who heads the relevant committee in the Senate.

Did he explain what it was?

He couldn't explain anything, and all of Biden's decisions have been fundamentally wrong in their eyes. We achieved that the issue will be reviewed. I hope we will get a positive solution.

These questions have been raised at the highest level, both by the Baltic states and the European Commission. One of the reasons for my visit to the U.S. was to bring this issue directly to the attention of decision-makers. It is being addressed, and Estonia has been very proactive in advocating for a resolution. I hope we will get a fair outcome.

But we also sent an official request for information or question. Have we not received any answer from them as to what happened?

These issues are currently being raised at the highest level by both the Baltic states and the European Commission. And one of the reasons for my visit was to raise this issue among decision-makers. This is being done, so Estonia has been very active here. And I hope that we will get a very normal solution

* Defined as any of a group of chemically similar metallic elements comprising the lanthanide series and usually scandium and yttrium. Despite the name they are not especially rare in their incidence, but they tend to occur together in the natural environment, making them difficult to separate from one another.

--

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