Energetic and determined, one of the few women in the room when decisions are made at the European level, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas is used to being called “too Baltic” or “a warmonger” for her support. total Ukraine vis-à-vis Russia and his calls for the rearmament of Europe. She is not, she emphasizes, nor does she know anyone in Estonia or Ukraine who wants war, on the contrary.
“We want peace, but lasting peace. And a peace on Russia’s terms will not be,” because “after a few years of pause, the aggressor will go further.” Weakness “provokes” Russian President Vladimir Putin, which is why he defends investing more in defense and, despite being liberal, he has raised taxes in his country, which already dedicates 3% of its GDP to military spending. “The leaders of countries with better neighbors than Estonia have problems explaining this to public opinion because in times of peace there are many better places to put money,” but “it cannot happen to us like with the pandemic,” he warns. “Because the problem with defense is that by the time you need it, it’s too late,” he warns.
“I am explaining to my country why we have to raise taxes. I am a member of the liberal party and I know I am committing political suicide but I have no choice. I know that if things get bad, in a few years Estonians will say to themselves that perhaps they should have paid ten euros a month more in taxes to have avoided this,” explains Kallas in an interview with several European media at the headquarters of the embassy of Estonia before the EU, on whose façade the Ukrainian insignia flies, along with the flag of the Baltic country.
What risk does Russia pose to Estonia?
The same as for their countries. We are together in NATO and there are no first and second class countries there. An attack against one is an attack against all. Europe is a small continent. If you compare with World War II, Poland did not last as long as Ukraine does now. If it falls, the war will spread to all of Europe. We must help Ukraine so as not to have to talk about who will go behind because, if she is defeated, we will have a pause for a few years and then we will see the same thing on a large scale, especially if we do not invest in defense. We must not forget that Russia is afraid of going to war with NATO. They don’t want to, neither do we. But you have to understand not only what they don’t want but what they fear. If we don’t invest enough in defense now, they won’t be afraid.
What do you think of Russia’s renewed nuclear rhetoric? Is it a real threat or an attempt to intimidate the West?
It’s nothing new, they’ve been saying it for a long time. They want to intimidate us, scare us, and in some countries it works. If you look at the destruction that Russia has caused in Ukraine it is greater than what a nuclear weapon would cause, it has wiped out entire cities, like Mariupol. I can’t say for sure that Putin is not going to use the nuclear weapon because he is a crazy man and can do anything, but I think his main objective is to scare us. And if there is one thing they are very good at, it is sowing fear in our societies, with tailored strategies for each country.
What is the goal of rearmament, to deliver weapons to Ukraine or to prepare for war?
Both. One objective is to supply material to Ukraine and another, to replenish our arsenals, to invest more in our collective defense.
How to do that and, at the same time, avoid that third world war?
The way to avoid a third war is for Russia not to win this war. Because if Ukraine loses, if Russia expands its territory and nothing happens to it, we would have a very serious problem. History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes and we have many lessons to learn about how to treat bullies. Let’s learn and do the right thing.
Emmanuel Macron has talked about the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine. Was that okay with him, as part of a necessary strategic ambiguity, or does he regret that it is a divisive issue for the allies?
We have been wondering for a long time what Russia will do next, it is good that they are the ones wondering what we are going to do. Because why be so clear? Why confirm to Russia that it is something that we are going to do or not? We don’t have to do it. They fear going to war with Europe, so strategic ambiguity is good these days. There was no talk of putting boots on the ground but in my Parliament they asked me if I could rule out Estonian soldiers going to Ukraine and I said no, because Putin needs that confirmation, no one else. In my country it is Parliament that decides the sending of troops.
Do you think Europe is aware of the existential risk it runs if Ukraine is defeated? Do you see political will to act?
It depends on the countries. How many NATO members invest more than 2% of their GDP in defense? When the war started, in 2022, I was sure that the allies would increase their military spending because the threat had become real, but to my surprise that did not happen. Many promises were made but, if you read the fine print of some, they said that they were going to spend 2% in 2030 [this is the case of Germany]. In 1988, during the Cold War, all countries spent more than 2% on defense, some even more than 6%. Because? Because the threat was real, there was a cold war. Now we have a hot war and yet some countries don’t do it. I don’t see facts, only words.
How can Europe prepare for a potential Donald Trump victory and what do you think will happen to NATO?
The simplest way is to increase defense spending and do more for our own security. The president of the United States cannot simply leave NATO, they have approved clauses to prevent it, but he is the one who decides and it may happen that one day troops are needed and he says that he is not participating. We have to be prepared for that. But when Trump was president, NATO countries began spending more on defense. Slowly, but they started.
