For Estonia, the threat level keeps rising, but many people feel that something is wrong with the political (I emphasize: political) leadership of national defense. This feeling is not deceptive.

When the full-scale war in Ukraine began in 2022, Estonia was a leader in assisting Ukraine and strengthening Europe's defense capabilities. Clear messages and concrete actions came from Estonia. By now, Estonia has disappeared from this picture, and even domestically, the focus has become scattered.

In dangerous and uncertain times, people expect certainty and clarity from politicians involved in governing the country. This is not being provided. Every decision only increases the confusion.

The formation of national defense policy should be untouched by the general political madness — but it is not. The government has unilaterally abandoned the principle that important foreign and security policy decisions should be made based on cross-party consensus. They do not even shy away from openly admitting this.

Some decisions are outright absurd and contradictory. For example, the government has declared its intention to withdraw from the Ottawa Convention, which bans the use of anti-personnel mines, while simultaneously emphasizing that anti-personnel mines will not be introduced.

Initially, criticism from the opposition regarding ammunition procurement was dismissed with misleading public statements. Only after former Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Defense Kusti Salm debunked these fabrications in his typically straightforward manner did the truth come out. Yes, not a single euro of the €1.6 billion allocation has actually been spent. If everything is supposedly in order and going as it should, why wasn't this admitted right away?

Prime Minister Kristen Michal and Minister of Defense Hanno Pevkur (both Reform) present the government's still-unfunded and undefined decision to increase defense spending as a major breakthrough, while at the same time, they once again ignore the military advice provided by the commander of the Defense Forces (EDF) Gen. Andrus Merilo and look for ways to only partially implement it.

Estonia has no fiscal policy plan for whether and how to finance its NATO defense commitments — that is, how to ensure the defense of Estonia from the very first meter. Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi (Reform) does not have NATO security clearance, meaning he is not even aware of Estonia's actual defense needs.

Minister of Foreign Affairs Margus Tsahkna (Eesti 200) has described as a "fair" peace a solution that would require Ukraine to cede territory and essentially pay compensation for the military "aid" received — several times over its actual value.

The Estonian government has been unable to justify why it disregards the increasingly urgent threat assessments from both Estonian and partner intelligence services, which [former EDF Chief] Gen. Martin Herem has also publicly referenced.

The Estonian government has not shared any information with the public about discussions, at the prime ministerial level, regarding the deployment of troops to Ukraine. According to the Constitution, a decision to deploy the Defense Forces abroad can only be made by the Riigikogu, yet the prime minister has hinted that agreements on this have already been made elsewhere.

The National Defense Committee was presented with a study related to offshore wind farms. The study does not address the use of naval strike missiles at all — an issue publicly highlighted by Navy Commander Cdre. Ivo Värk in an ERR article last November. Months were spent waiting for the study's findings, yet the joint session of the Riigikogu National Defense Committee and Economic Affairs Committee concluded with the realization that no positions could actually be formed or decisions made.

It also emerged during the National Defense Committee meeting that the government's security cabinet has not, for six or seven months, shown any interest in the actual progress of the €1.6 billion additional ammunition procurement. This means the prime minister has not been concerned about it.

The National Defense Committee has also failed in its oversight function and must reevaluate its working methods.

What advice would I give to government policymakers in this situation?

The most important issue is that military decisions must be based on the military advice of the EDF commander. It must not be merely pretended to be followed — it must actually be followed. The same applies to the outcome of NATO's force capability goal-setting process. There can be no trust if there is deception and dishonesty.

--

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