Address by Kristiina Ojuland Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Estonia at the French Institute of International Relations

Paris, France

Estonia after Prague and Copenhagen

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to once more greet my Latvian and Lithuanian colleagues, and all the seminar participants. It is a great privilege and honour to be able to participate in the discussions taking place here, in the world renowned French Institute of International Relations. My sincerest thanks to the Institute’s director, Thierry de Montbrial, and to all his colleagues, for organising this seminar. And I would also like to thank all of you who found the time to come here to exchange views about Europe and the Baltic States after the Prague and Copenhagen Summits. The contemporary fast paced environment, in which we exist, is, both blatantly and subtly, leaving its imprint upon almost all aspects of international relations, which has of course influenced developments connected with the Baltic states. And now, concentrating upon this seminar’s main theme, I would like to share with you the following thoughts.

The Estonian parliament  --  Riigikogu  --  has decided, that this coming September 14, Estonia will hold the compulsory referendum concerning European Union accession, the results of which are binding for the Government. Public support, in Estonia, for European Union accession, has lately been a stable 55%. Although the active opponents of the European Union are in the minority, opinion polls have nevertheless shown that the percentage of doubters is constantly high. The doubts have been raised by, among other things, two questions, which are directly connected with the debates being held at the European Convention. They deal with the relationship, which will exist between the individual citizen and social institutions, and the protection of the rights of small states within the European Union.

In the period before accession, a double burden falls upon the shoulders of the Acceding States. The populace of these countries is waiting for an answer to a very specific question:  what will accession bring with it? The European Union, in turn, is asking: what will you  --  the new ones  --  be bringing with you? The same questions, although with slightly different emphases, are being asked in connection with the upcoming NATO accession. And I believe, that, in the course of our discussions, today is the right moment to concentrate upon these questions.

The unifying of Europe is not an aim in itself. A European integration policy makes sense only if it is capable of achieving two goals: firstly, of influencing global policies which will determine the future; and secondly, of concretely and effectively contributing to the quality of life of every European citizen. Integration can successfully achieve both goals only if it maintains and respects the identity of every single individual  --  a core value, which is the basis for all culture, creativity, and motivation. And without which, true progress would be impossible. Let us not forget, for even a moment, that every nation’s, and especially a small nation’s, survival and development is greatly dependent upon its ability to influence political, cultural, administrative, and economic indicators outside of its ethnic borders. Therefore, in conjunction with European enlargement, small states are presented with both opportunities and responsibilities.

The nature of the Estonian Republic’s foreign policy is determined by our history, culture, and geographic location; by the fact that we are part of the cultural sphere, which adheres to Occidental values and an Occidental conception of the world; and by our comprehension of the fact that the necessity of ensuring our national security is of primary importance among all our other domestic and foreign policy requirements. Therefore, Estonia’s endeavour to join both the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the European Union has not been an end in itself, but rather, has been part of Estonia’s overall effort to create a political, economic, and administrative environment, in which our national interests can be developed on the basis of a new set of dynamics. Estonia’s belonging to the aforementioned international unions would not restrict the free space, which a nation requires for its existence, but would actually expand it, thereby increasing the nation’s opportunities and security.

Let us not forget, that our Western orientation has not been brought about by fantasies of an enjoyable life style, or by theoretical discussions concerning the philosophy of values. Although the sharing of common values is an inevitable prerequisite for integration with the West, this integration is, nevertheless, brought about by concrete political and economic conceptions of the nation’s will to persevere, by the realities of the globalising economic environment, by the challenges presented by new developments in the national security sphere, by the necessity for reducing dangers and risks.

But, by saying all this, I do not, in any way, wish to place in doubt the common values, which have served as a signpost in our quest to find allies, and in the process of making correct choices. Lately, there has been much talk about the differing ways in which the United States and Europe approach various events and developments. But, take notice that no one has ever placed in doubt the commonality of the basic values held by both the United States and the states of Europe. Question marks have, rather, been concentrated around the methods to be used to protect and propagate these values. The maintaining of common values, based upon the ideals of freedom, in the daily political agenda; and the constant vigilance that must be kept so that this pair of words  --  common values  --  will not fade, or become diluted, in international usage, is primarily the duty of small nations. And is the future-forming political challenge, which we have been confronted with in today’s world.

In principle, Estonia will, in the future, have to make a fundamental choice: whether to maintain a passive attitude, and assume a collective stance, without becoming involved in deliberations; or to prefer an active approach, and present our positions, even if they are not very popular. From the point of view of the efficient use of human labour and mental energy, the first alternative would be more suitable; whereas, from the point of view of promoting our interests and defending our principles, the second alternative would best serve our purposes. It is also apparent, that the support given to our partners within the framework of active participation in both EU and NATO joint endeavours, will give us greater grounds to hope for the active support of other Member States in matters, which might very concretely and narrowly be of interest primarily to Estonia. Besides the assuming of a definite position, Estonia can make a contribution based upon our experiences with carrying out extensive reforms. That, which we have had to go through, is a resource, which the “old timers” do not have. And we have already had opportunities for sharing our experiences with others.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Discussions at the European Convention, concerning the constitutional project and the future model of the Union, are reaching a decisive phase. It has been in our interests to join a foolproof and effective Union, which assures equal opportunities for both big and small states. When planning to make institutional changes, it is very important to observe the principle that all member states are equal. I believe, that it would be advantageous for the whole European Union, if, the near future would not bring with it the development of a club-like system, which would differentiate between old, intermediate, and new members. I would like to stress, that these “new comers” are not coming into the European Union with the aim of forming a separate power bloc, but wish, from the beginning, to be part of the overall structure, and are, from the beginning, oriented towards the joint solving of the EU’s common problems, and the carrying out of joint policies. The matters confronting the European Union as a whole, are matters which also confront us.

Since Estonia’s, and the majority of the European Union’s Member and Acceding States’ government structure is based upon the traditions of parliamentary democracy, we can assume, that these principles will also be observed as the future institutions of the EU are being established. We support reforms, which make institutions and their cooperative endeavours more efficient, more transparent, and more democratic. At the same time, we feel, that when planning reforms, it is essential to maintain the existing institutional balance. During the last ten years, Estonia has acquired the reputation of being a speedy reformer. And that the formulators of these reform policies have not paid much attention to another aspect, which has equal significance in the European Union  --  coolheaded prudence. Therefore, in an era of enormous projects and enormous opportunities, it is more than advisable to be cautiously constructive. Let us be progressively mobile, but not at the expense of consistency and conservatism.

Estonia does not support the idea of creating the post of “President of the European Council”. We definitely prefer to see the preservation of the rotating presidency in the European Council, in the Council of the European Union, and in Coreper. We find that the method of the Union has been effective and that it should be preserved. Also, the European Commission should not be assigned a lesser role. And we also believe, that based upon the principle of equality of all Member States, every Member State’s representation must definitely be maintained in the European Commission.

Estonia’s firm position is, that the role of the national parliaments should increase in a reformed European Union, especially when it comes to the question of subsidiarity. This means the establishment of a procedural mechanism, which would enable a national parliament to become much more involved in the EU’s legislative procedures, and to already do so during the early phases of this creative process. This is the only way that the European Union can be drawn closer to the domestic politics and the citizenry of the individual Member States. The national parliament must become the instrument for establishing an efficient connection between the individual citizen and the European Union. And much more effort should be put into the development of direct contacts between the individual members of the various parliaments. Instead of exchanging statements, instead of exchanging small talk in the corridors of the European Parliament, relationships should be based upon the concept of “European communication”. This means that human and cultural aspects, on the one hand, and everyday practicality, on the other, form a versatile whole, which, after all, is one of the basic principles behind the concept of European unity.

The Estonian philosopher Uku Masing has written, that small nations already have a wider scope of the world, since they cannot ignore the existence of larger nations. But just as the European Union is an inevitability for the present Acceding States, these same Acceding States are an inevitability for the European Union. In a globalising world, primarily small states are concerned about the maintaining of their national identity. At the same time, the European Union, in its present condition, is undergoing its own identity crisis, for instance, in dealing with the serious problems connected with legitimisation. But one thing is clear  --  these problems cannot be solved in isolation. Their solutions can be found only in an atmosphere of straightforwardness, which is dominated by the concepts of open dialogue and  sincere cooperation.

I thank you!