Kalle Laanet: I will make the decision!

Let us go back in time to the end of last year. Inappropriate motions to amend the marriage referendum bill included your proposed referendum question of whether Estonia should leave NATO. The Conservative People’s Party (EKRE) even sought to remove you as chairman of the Riigikogu National Defense Committee. Now, a mere month later, you have become defense minister. Do you regret the incident?

You see, they got their wish – I left the post of committee chair, even though it was to join the government. However, we need to place all of it in context, A certain party’s ministers and chairman have spent the last two years insulting different social groups without subjecting themselves to parliamentary control. Then there is the question of why was the marriage referendum (over whether marriage should remain exclusively a union between a man and woman – ed.) cooked up in the first place? It was clearly not the most pressing matter in society at the time. And because a clear “no” campaign had been launched, questions we asked were formulated to logically necessitate a corresponding answer.

A lot of people were bothered. Was it not out of place?

It could only bother those looking to be bothered by it. NATO was, is and will remain Estonia’s most important ally. That much has always been crystal clear.

Eesti Ekspress suggested yesterday that you were put in place by the Reform Party’s retired generals Ants Laaneots and Johannes Kert. Was that the case or did you propose your own candidacy?

Do I look like someone who goes and offers anyone anything? I think not. It is a great honor to have the support of the generals. They are among the best experts in Estonia. It means that what I have done in the National Defense Committee, my party and the Riigikogu has been found commendable by former generals. However, I cannot tell you whether they supported me, you will need to ask them that.

What about your relationship with your coalition partner and former party Center? Let us go back to 2012 and discuss why you were voted out?

I was thrown out. I was clearly thrown out of the party because I could not support then chairman Edgar Savisaar asking for funds from Russia.

What is your relationship with Center today?

I get along just fine with people. I have different relationships with different people, some closer than others. The Center Party has an entirely different leadership today and behaves very differently.

How will this government’s defense policy differ from its predecessor’s?

I hold consistency to be the greatest value in defense policy. Consistent activity to make sure Estonia is defended and for it to remain the case in the future. Why? Looking at defense policy, decisions and their effects are not for a few months or a year. They need to serve for a decade and longer. We have a ten-year development plan and a four-year development cycle. Everything about defense policy is extremely long-winded – for example, obtaining or restoring certain capacities. Decisions usually take years.

You are looking at a term of two years. What are you looking to implement in that time?

To create synergy between different ministries for a better end result and possible cost saving. Boosting naval and air capacity is included in the coalition agreement, as is better equipment for the II Infantry Brigade. We also need to continue prioritizing broad-based national defense and people being prepared to contribute to national defense by understanding its importance. Finally, there are our allies of course. Both NATO and other partners, whether we are talking about Nordic or Baltic neighbors.

The previous coalition clashed with the Defense Forces over EKRE looking to decree which capacities the armed forces should develop. What about you? Will you listed to [Commander of the Defense Forces] Maj. Gen. Martin Herem and [Director of the Estonian Center for Defense Investments] Kusti Salm or will you try to develop broad-based national defense on your own?

I will definitely listen to both Herem and Salm as well as a lot of other specialists, but the decisions will be made by the government and yours truly.

If the previous coalition agreement aimed to promote relations in the entire region, including Russia, yours makes no mention of the latter.

The security situation today is that Russia is the number one potential threat for Estonia. Looking at the socioeconomic situation and people’s mood in Russia, while their president continues to invest in military might. The people might be poor and starving, but there is always money for the military. All of these activities are aimed at offensive capacity and not defense, and it is not difficult to guess who the potential targets would be.

Does that mean you will not be seeking a friendly rapport with Russia?

 It would be very difficult to achieve in the field of defense.

Maj. Gen. Martin Herem has suggested that the Baltics would need missile artillery and anti-ship capacity first. He has also said that the military leaders of the three countries agree in this, while it still needs to be sold to governments and politicians. What is your opinion of the plan and would you be willing to agree on something like that with your Baltic colleagues?

When I served as interior minister, my Baltic colleagues and I always coordinated our topics and positions before flying to Brussels and defended them together. We had a lot more say like that. The more we can have in common in terms of plans and action with our neighbors, the more security we can produce. Of course, I would agree to such a plan. A whole can offer more than three individual pieces.

Do you feel Estonian schools should offer more in the way of national defense education?

I just had a conversation on this very topic with the secretary general [of the Ministry of Defense] and I told him that we should discuss with the Ministry of Education and Research making national defense education mandatory. I feel it would be necessary.

Are young people keen to listen to you when you visit schools? Are they well versed in matters of defense or is it the opposite?

Young people are different. Some have a very clear picture, while others haven’t a clue. I believe it should be a mandatory part of the curriculum to render that comprehension more even.

Would you take forward Mart Helme’s Police and Border Guard Board (PPA) crisis reserve plan to which 100 people have already been recruited?

We should have a clear picture of our volunteers and their skills. The reality today is that the same person can serve as an assistant police officer one day, a naval rescuers on the next and take part in Defense League training after that. We know that every organization reports having so many volunteers. But when it is necessary to deploy two or more of them at the same time, it turns out the numbers don’t match and we don’t have enough people. I believe Estonia should have an integral picture of volunteer activity that we could call a database.

Then we can ask the next question of who is in charge of which functions and what would be the point of an internal security operative regiment. Perhaps it would be more sensible to invest the proposed €20 million in improving PPA capacity instead of creating a parallel structure with parallel staff who will need training, uniforms, equipment etc. I believe that a PPA crisis reserve would not be purposeful in Estonia.