Lennart Meri: the choice is between Europe and Russia


According to Lennart Meri, the citizens of Estonia have to choose tomorrow between Europe and Russia and it is not to be forgotten that the Soviet system is still being daily reproduced in Estonia.

Q: What are you and the Estonian people going to vote for tomorrow (on March 7)?

A: It is like a mathematical equation that, when simplified, will have two possible results. One is Europe, the other, Russia.

Q: And the difference is that clear?

A: Yes. Let us overlook the time factor, since it is much more difficult to determine, but the tendencies are really clear. In the words of a fine Estonian writer: We are a frontier state. We are on the border and only a small push is needed to precipitate us over the edge to one side or to help us ascend to the other side.

Q: In your speech on the 81. Anniversary Day of Estonia you seemed to warn the voters against politicians with authoritarian inclinations. The voters would maybe like to know who you had in mind?

A: Speaking of authoritarianism, we must bear in mind that this danger is always present in Estonia, as it is in every other normal state. It is dangerous to imagine that the times of stalins and hitlers are eternally over. Democracy has to be reproduced daily. In Estonia, the soviet system is also being reproduced every day. It is important what the majority of people are doing. Speaking of autocracy, we have a good example in the fate of Slovakia. We know that the integration of Estonia into the European Union depends on our competitive spirit. The Slovakian economy was maybe more competitive than ours, but the authoritarian Slovakia was not invited to the enlargement negotiations.

If we speak of the EU as a homogenous or unified alliance, then this unity is not manifest in culture or language. It is manifest in democracy and the rule of law. Slovakia did not fulfil these criteria and was unceremoniously left aside.

Q: How should Estonian voters recognize the forces and politicians who could lead Estonia to a non-European course?

A: I am a head of state whose activity is based on the Estonian constitution and the president's oath of office that it contains and that first of all gives me responsibilities. But, in the longer perspective, most of the European nations have attained democracy. Consequently, we must trust the people's instinct. The people have a unique ability - ability to listen and to recognize what is right and what the candidates are saying only in order to gather votes.

I am old-fashioned and it seems to me that a meeting with a candidate is much more fruitful than a meeting via television or the newspapers. Most questionable of all are the enormous portrait-posters. Already now it is clear that the cost of the present elections campaign is much higher than at the previous elections. If we continue the same way, then in fifty years' time we can expect portraits of fifty square metres. This is not democratic development. On the contrary, this is degeneration of democracy.

The experience of this year's election campaign stresses the need for the parliament to establish an obligation for the parties and candidates to declare the finances of their campaigns. And the press should also be much more interested in where this money has come from. We have arrived at an era when a big purse can decisively change the outcome of elections. We cannot allow dirty money in Estonian politics, it endangers our constitutional order.

Q: According to public opinion polls, only a few weeks before the elections almost a third of Estionian voters had not yet made up their mind. Many people say that it does not make a difference who they vote for, since nothing will change anyway and nothing depends on their opinion. How would it be possible to reconvince these people - or would it be necessary at all?

A: Above all, I would like to turn to the younger voters who are usually more sceptical. The blue-black-white flag has not always flown above Estonia. What you take for granted was once a dangerous dream for your mothers and fathers. When you go to the polls, you help to defend our flag. These elections are a very grave matter for us, because the Estonian internal policy has presented the nation with serious choices.

Q: If we compare Estonia with other European states, is it unusual that a couple of weeks before the elections a third of voters does not yet know who to vote for?

A: When we look at the recent election contest between Helmut Kohl and Gerhard Schröder, we see that there were also a lot of people who left the decision-making for the election day.

But there is an additional difficulty in Estonia. The front of problems we intend to break through is much narrower than the line of parties who aim at one or another section of this front. This makes the final decision difficult for the voter. The voter has to understand what makes one party different from the other. For the majority of people, the continuity of independent Estonia is the most important aim. These are general values. But besides that, each citizen has his or her own personal preferences. If the voter's preferences have still not been sorted out by today, this means that the dialogue between the parties and the voter has been inadequate or too rhetorical.

Q: If we look at the possible lineup of the new parlament, it seems that there will not be too many young politicians?

A: I have tried to imagine the next parliament - not as a party landscape, of course, but as a working organ - and I have asked myself what would be more valuable for our nation: that the experience accumulated during these years would remain at hand, that the parliament would change only minimally, or the contrary: that it would change maximally? If we formulate the question like this, then it is very difficult to answer, since both possibilities give a positive as well as a negative result. But there is a possible way of reasoning. The more there are politicians with years of experience in parliament and in the government, the stronger impression the younger generation gets that it will be a long time before they have a chance. If all the places are filled with the older and intermediate generation, it can diminish the younger generation's interest in politics. Most probably it does, and directs more and more of the young people away from politics. This kind of development would be dangerous for Estonia. This problem would not bother me if we had a long tradition of democracy, but we are yet in the process of formation. I think I am not mistaken if I say that there has not yet been quite as long a leap from an unjust system to a just rule of law. Thus it is perfectly possible that a middle-aged or older person is honest, but still cannot accept the truths that have always prevailed in Europe. He does not realise what he can expect from the state and what his own obligations are towards the state. This is what I called reproduction of the Soviet mode of thought. It happens every day. But having given it a name, we are at least aware of it.

Q: Soon you will have to nominate a politician to form the new government. Are you ready to make this proposition to any party leader?

A: It would be inappropriate for me to go into details when there is so little time left before the elections. First, a new parliament has to assemble and the old government to resign, as the constitution provides. After that I will nominate a prime minister, again according to the constitution. So let us not run ahead of the events.

Q: Judging by the previous experience, to what extent are the party programs living documents that will be remembered and put into practice after the elections?

A: This question does not have an answer that would equally apply to all the parties.

Q: A year ago you said in an interview to Postimees that there are too many parties in Estonia. How much hope is there that the party landscape will be better arranged by the upcoming elections?

A: Happily, we have rather made a step forward than backwards in this matter. Speaking of rearranging the landscape and the Estonian citizens' participation in determining the fate of the nation, I would like to draw attention to the fact that during the fifty years of Soviet occupation there were also elections. What was the prime message of these mock polls? Everybody knew that there was no connection whatsoever between the act of voting and the election results. It was a one horse race, and the horse belonged to an alien state.

When we gathered in the Mainor building to discuss the future election law, my opinion regrettably remained in the minority. I tried to stress that our election system should be so simple and transparent that there would be visible connection between the decision of the voter and the election result. But I lost the argument and now I understand the perplexion of the Estonian voter who sees that one can gain a seat in the parliament with 15,000 as well as with 34 votes. Our election system is fair and just, but so complex that the voter cannot establish clearly how one or another candidate managed to get into the parliament. This can become dangerous in the longer perspective, if the conclusion is that whatever the voter decides, his decision has relatively little importance. The election mechanism has be transparent enough that there is no need to extract a cube root to learn the real outcome. Ninety eight per cent of the voters do not feel related to the cube root result. The new parliament should thoroughly discuss this problem.

Q: All the parties are ready to cooperate with almost every other party and it often seems that the game is only about gaining power and staying in power. Should there be a line somewhere in the parties' programs and pre-election promises that they would not cross in order to join a future government coalition?

A: There should definitely be such a line. In the interest of developing a clearer party landscape, there should be sharper boundaries between the party programs and the parties' readiness to form coalitions. This would be more propitious for Estonia. And then it would be clearer which choices the voter has.

Q: But in the other hand, inflexible division lines can result in yet another minority government. Is Estonia ready for that?

A: Judging by party policy and other experience, Estonia is not ready for that.

Q: When did you decide for yourself who you are going to vote for on March 7?

A: The president of Estonia has the same rights as every other Estonian citizen. Let us leave it to the reader to guess what my answer could be.

Q: Where are you going to vote?

A: According to my old habit, on Nurme street at Nõmme.


Urmas Paet

back | archive of interviews | main page