As international tensions provoked by Russia’s aggressive saber-rattling on the borders of eastern Ukraine persist, the former president of Estonia, Toomas Hendrick Ilves, has just spoken out candidly, in his inimitable percipient, if blunt, style about the broader context of today’s crisis, and the deeper issues and challenges involved.
In an April 12 online discussion by the American Purpose magazine and capably moderated by the Atlantic Council’s Melinda Haring, in which several dozen top specialists participated, or watched, the Estonian statesman was as sharp and as candid as ever.
Reflecting, and drawing on his vast experience – Ilves was the president of Estonia for two terms from 2006 to 2016 — he had plenty to say about Ukraine. But he also spoke about the condescending attitude towards the East European states which he perceives as still endemic among Western European political elites, maintaining that it is problematic and divisive rather than helpful.
In particular, he recalled how Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel strongly opposed Ukraine’s membership in NATO. He also criticized the more recent behavior of France’s President Emmanuel Macron in claiming to speak on behalf of Europe without consulting other European states first, especially the east European ones.
Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, I was a colleague and friend of Ilves when we worked together at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in Munich. We hardly expected that the Soviet Union would collapse in the rapid way that it finally did and that the two nations we were working on behalf of would become independent states so soon.
Toomas, an American-born Estonian, took a huge gamble and moved to Estonia. He was greeted with open arms, in the way that the Baltic states welcomed talented and patriotic professionals from their diasporas. Before he knew it, he was the country’s ambassador to Washington, then foreign minister, political leader, and eventually president.
His Western upbringing and education helped him in his task to modernize Estonia as a new member of NATO and the EU and to represent his country with distinction abroad. Not surprisingly, he was re-elected for a second term.
During the discussion, I asked Toomas about the current interplay between Western and Eastern Europe, and about the extent that Ukraine, and for that matter, Belarus, in their current predicament vis a vis Russia, are perceived as European issues.
He immediately acknowledged that perceptions of Europe and what it is and represents differ markedly within this community of nations despite the European Union’s eastward expansion. Those countries who are next door to Russia and have experienced what Moscow’s rule entails are still not fully appreciated for what they endured, overcame, and their commitment to initial core European values.
“Connecting the countries of Eastern Europe from Estonia down to Ukraine, from the Baltic to the Black and even Adriatic seas, remains something that is mentally still an unfinished project,” he replied. “Even though we may be quite successful, we are not yet part of the consciousness of Europe among many people among policymakers.”
Ilves gave Macron’s enunciation earlier this year of a vision of Europe’s “strategic autonomy” in the context of US-EU relations as an example. “That Macron came out with his idea without even consulting the East Europeans (Okay, you can ignore little Estonia, but he didn’t consult with anyone). He just went over our heads.”
And this, in his view, unfortunately, indicates a certain residual mindset.
“It’s a mentality that should have long gone, but it’s not, it’s still there. There is this attitude that although the East Europeans are this, that, or the other, which all of us have run into, all of us from Eastern Europe.”
The Estonian former president was even more explicit in pinpointing this condescending attitude. “Of course, the wogs over there – we have to deal with them – they take our money, all of this stuff.”
To counter this, Ilves said, that “this is one reason why we push all the time in Estonia on corruption because at this point, we are less corrupt” than most of the new EU member countries. “So, we can point this out, and say don’t treat us this way.” But, he added, “it’s a long battle, and it’s actually something that has lasted a long time.”
Ilves, a long-standing and consistent friend of Ukraine, was asked for his thoughts about it right now. While emphasizing that Ukraine needs to deal more resolutely in combatting corruption and clipping the wings of the oligarchs, he considers that it should be supported more than until now, for it remains a geopolitical linchpin.
“Basically, Ukraine has not been a focus of attention in the way it should have been,” he replied. “I’m Zbigniew Brzezinski in this regard. Russia with Ukraine is an empire, without it, it’s just a big poor country. And I think we ought to do far more for Ukraine, and think in the categories of the Marshall Plan, some kind of creative solutions to get them into NATO.”
Ilves smiled recalling the residual opposition from some of the key players within Europe, notably Germany and Merkel.
He recounted that in April 2008, when he was president of Estonia, he was present at the Bucharest huge NATO summit where the Americans were pressing for the candidacies of Ukraine and Georgia to be considered for NATO membership.
“I was there when Angela went: ‘No! No! No membership action plan for Ukraine! No! No!’ At the same time, Poland’s president Lech Kaczynski was jumping up and down furious.” Finally, U.S. President George Bush had to placate Merkel, and Ukraine lost its chance.
There were other topics that Ilves was asked about during the discussion, but a shortage of space does not allow me to elaborate.
Briefly, on Belarus, he feels that its dictator Aleksander Lukashenko is “not sustainable” and that Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, whatever doubts about him may persist, deserves our respect for having the courage to return to Russia and having thereby set an example.
The general message from the former Estonian president was that in the face of the intensified threat from Russia “we’re all adrift” and “need to come together.” Europe needs to strengthen its sense of unity based on shared values, enhanced mutual understanding, and avoidance of any obsolete Yalta mentality.
Vladimir Putin should not be allowed to get away with his crude menacing behavior but be put in his place under strengthened sanctions and isolated until he changes his tune. The renewal of the synergies between Washington and Europe in addressing the challenge of Moscow, now flaunting its makeshift strategic partnership with Beijing, in Ilves’ view, should suffice to make this possible.
All in all, a stimulating contribution from a figure who has become perhaps East Europe’s most impressive representative and does not hesitate to acknowledge that diplomacy should when necessary, give way to honesty and frankness.
