Voir tous les articles

A Conversation with Lauri Hussar, President of the Estonian Parliament

How do you explain the alignment between the White House and the Kremlin? On Sunday March 2, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov declared that the reconfiguration of American foreign policy initiated by Trump “largely aligns” with the Russian vision of Western values and what the world order should be.

Everything has happened quite quickly. For me, one of the key triggers for the White House’s shift is the internal politics of the United States. There have been promises and a very clear vision that Trump laid out during the campaign and now it seems that the White House is somewhat trapped by the commitments it made, which is pushing them to take further action.

However, the reality is much more complicated—not just in terms of US domestic politics but also in the broader geopolitical landscape. 

I do not think that what we are witnessing is beneficial to the process at a time when Russia is weakening, sanctions are working, and they may soon be looking for a way out of the war. Now it seems Russia is preparing for the next wave of attacks against Ukraine but what has happened in the White House between Trump and Zelensky has also served as a loud wake-up call for Europe.

After the leaders’ meeting in London on March 2, we are seeing a clear determination to contribute more to European defense and strengthen cooperation. We see that France is deeply committed to defending Europe and enhancing its defense capabilities. I see strong political will, not just from France but from many European countries.

This is not just about the European Union—it’s about Europe more broadly. Countries like Norway are highly dedicated to defense and military development, and the UK is also playing a crucial role: the British brigade in Estonia and the French troops stationed there demonstrate how committed our allies are to securing the alliance and the eastern border of both the European Union and NATO.

Can and will Europe support Ukraine without the US? 

Since January, there have been no major contributions from the US.

This remains an ongoing story, what we see is more of a phase in this discussion rather than a complete halt. We will see how the relationship between Ukraine and the United States develops. From what I have observed, the term used has been “pause,” not “stop.” I also recall that in 2024, there was a period of nearly six months when the US did not provide military aid to Ukraine at all, so this is not the first time the US has paused its military assistance. But in the end thanks to speaker Mike Johnson the 61 billion dollar aid package was put to voting in the US Congress and Ukraine got the possibilities to stabilize the situation and in some places even took the initiative in the front line.

Now we must look ahead and focus on what steps we can take on ourselves.

For a long time, there has been talk in Europe about the need to prioritize defense and security. However, there has been more discussion than real action. Now, that is starting to change. There is a genuine will to act, and I see strong commitment from European states.

A positive sign is that Europe’s defense industry is ready to scale up production. I am confident that Europe’s defense sector can outproduce Russia in every way. With the right government procurement strategies in place, production and innovation can be significantly increased.

The decisions that have been made—and those that are yet to come—are crucial. They need to be implemented quickly.

Europe is much stronger than we sometimes realise. But we must cooperate, work together, and remember why we are doing this. We share the same values, the same understanding of freedom. We have so much in common that is worth defending.

That is why this effort is not only necessary—it is worth it.

Favouring US purchases to keep America engaged has long been the strategy of European countries. Is there now an EU consensus on prioritising European defence procurement?

It is also up to the Americans to answer.

They need to define how they see the future of cooperation and the future of the alliance. In that sense, this question is perhaps even more relevant for them.

From the European side, what I have heard and seen is very convincing—defense spending is increasing, production is expanding, and collaboration is strengthening. This is a strong signal, and we must move quickly to build on it.

At the same time, the US must reflect on what is truly important for them. We cannot make that decision for them—it is theirs to make. However, they have invested so much in Europe’s defense over the years, working alongside European allies and leading NATO for decades.

I don’t believe they will simply walk away from that. I am confident that cooperation will continue, because our shared history and common interests far outweigh any differences.

Russia and the United States say they want peace and Ukraine and the Europeans want war — how can we fight this narrative?

I believe European public opinion is strongly in favor of Ukraine. In France, two-thirds of the population firmly support Ukraine’s fight. The same sentiment is reflected in Estonia and across Europe because people clearly understand what is happening and who the aggressor is.

President Zelensky pointed out that since 2014 Russia has violated the ceasefire more than 20 times, which is highly significant. In Estonia, we know this all too well.

You cannot trust Putin—everything he and his regime say is a lie. The methods he uses are the same as those of the former KGB. That is the foundation of his rule, and he is not just trying to control Russia; he is trying to impose his influence on the world.

We must acknowledge this reality, resist it, and stand firm in defense of our principles and values. We must also recognize the true nature of the regime in Russia and work together to stand against it. Cooperation is essential in this fight.

How do you see the path to a ceasefire and peace agreement?

Estonia is one of the few countries that signed a peace treaty with Russia on its own terms.

In 1920, the Treaty of Tartu was possible because of Estonia’s military strength, international sanctions, and Soviet Russia’s isolation. The Soviet regime urgently needed peace to break its isolation, as it had no other viable option.

We also relied on the support of our allies, such as the British fleet, which played a crucial role in helping Estonia. Ultimately, we signed the Treaty of Tartu under our conditions—a historical precedent that remains relevant today.

Nothing has fundamentally changed. If we want lasting peace between Ukraine and Russia, we must continue supporting Ukraine, enforcing sanctions, and building a strong international coalition that can serve as a future security guarantee for Ukraine.

Additionally, Europe holds more than 300 billion euros in frozen Russian assets. These funds should be used—not just for military aid, but also for rebuilding Ukraine—as a form of prepaid compensation for the destruction caused by Russia.

This is a crucial step, as it provides significant resources to support Ukraine in both its defense and reconstruction.

Is Donald Trump causing a schism in the West?

Let’s look at this with perspective—issues come and go, and much of this is rhetorical, often tied to domestic politics in the US.

We don’t need to dwell on Trump or worry too much about him.

We need to focus on ourselves.

Let’s start our mornings not by reading about what happened overnight in the United States, but by focusing on what we are doing—our contributions to defense and security, how we are strengthening cooperation between countries.

Let’s make it clear: Europe is a power.

Not just a market. For a long time, when we spoke about the European Union, we focused on the single market and economic matters. But now, we must go further.

Europe is a power, and we must recognize and embrace that. On the other hand, the US is still our biggest and most important ally, with whom we should cooperate and work closely together to guarantee peace and security in the free world.

That is what truly matters.

The President of the Italian Republic and the President of the French Republic speak of a risk of “vassalization” and call on Europeans to react against “ vassalization”. Would you agree?

It is clear today that we need to focus on our defense.

We must strengthen our cooperation even further and adopt a broader perspective—not just within the EU, but including all NATO members and allies.

We must work closely with those who are willing to stand with us. It is essential to bring together those who pursue the same goal—defending the free world. 

That is why cooperation among like-minded nations is the first and perhaps most vital step.

Looking ahead, the next step must be to accelerate our military industry. Europe has immense production capabilities. Defense companies in Germany, France, and across Europe are ready to ramp up production if the necessary procurements and political decisions are in place.

It is widely acknowledged that if the political will exists, Europe can outproduce Russia in every way. This is a key factor in deterring aggression. By demonstrating that we are fully capable of securing our countries and continent, we send a strong message.

How do you see the role of public opinion in this new phase? 

We must work within our societies to defend democracy. We need to explain why this is necessary, why it matters, and ensure the public understands all the details. Public support for this process is essential.

But we also must defend democracy from external threats, including interference through social media. What happened in Romania is deeply concerning. We have seen interference through platforms like TikTok and other social media channels and it is not merely a matter of a few hundred thousand euros influencing democracy—it is a much broader issue. We know exactly where this interference is coming from.

That is why we must ensure our democracies remain unharmed. All hostile activities in social media must be closely monitored.

Currently, social media operates like the Wild West and this imbalance creates a real problem, as social media is being used for hostile purposes. We must acknowledge this reality and confront it.

One of the fundamental principles of democracy is equal rights for all. When certain actors manipulate technical platforms to amplify their influence—especially for undemocratic and malicious purposes—democracy must defend against it.

This is not just a question of freedom of speech. It is a matter of sovereignty.

We see Elon Musk on X supporting the candidate in Romania who benefited from the social media boost, and US pressure on the EU over its digital regulations is mounting. Can and should the EU Commission defend Europe’s autonomy in the digital space?

I believe so. We must firmly stand on the side of democracy and democratic principles. One of the most fundamental principles is that everyone should have equal rights and be treated fairly.

If a technical platform allows algorithms to favor certain candidates—something we witnessed in Romania, where one candidate had a clear advantage over others—then we can no longer call it a democracy.

Such practices cannot be allowed. When a process is technically controlled rather than democratically driven, it ceases to be a true democracy.

The EU made the right decision in addressing these issues. We live in an information society where the most powerful force is information itself. And if information holds the power to shape societies, then there are countless ways to influence public opinion—especially through social media. When social media is misused for harmful purposes, left unregulated, and allowed to destabilize democratic processes, it becomes a serious threat.

I remember the unregulated “wild west” of social media in the European Union about eight or nine years ago. Since then, with the introduction of regulations, the landscape has become much clearer.

Not only has it become more transparent, but it also aligns better with democratic values.

The Kremlin and its propagandists claim that the Baltic states are using Europe to prepare for war with Russia. How do you respond?  

I believe it’s not just the Baltic states that recognise the problem—today, all democratic countries and leaders within the European Union fully acknowledge the threat posed by Russia.

We have long been at the forefront of this issue, acting as a kind of warning signal since 2007, repeatedly urging others not to trust Russia. Their imperial ambition to restore the Soviet Union has always been clear. The concerns we raised two decades ago are now undeniable realities.

For years, skepticism—especially in Western Europe—led many to dismiss our warnings. The prevailing attitude was, Let’s hear them out, but not take them too seriously.

That mindset has completely changed. Last year the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen openly admitted, “Central and Eastern European countries, you were always right about Russia. I’m sorry we didn’t always listen, but you were right”.

Now, there is no division between most of the European countries on this issue. Everyone recognizes Russia as an imperialistic power seeking to rebuild its empire.

We must face this challenge together.

How do you see Estonia’s role in this new phase?

Estonia has played a crucial role in supporting Ukraine, making us one of its strongest allies. In fact, we have contributed more than 1,000 euros per citizen in military aid, totaling over €1.4 billion. This amounts to approximately 0.6% to 0.7% of all military aid provided to Ukraine—a remarkable contribution for such a small country.

We are now increasing our military spending to 4% and moving toward 5%. We are strengthening our defense capabilities, deepening cooperation with allies, and reinforcing our national security.

Strong diplomacy is also a key part of our approach. Estonia’s role has always been to lead by example. Even when we joined the European Union, we were seen as the “best student in the class,” known for implementing European legislation with exceptional diligence—sometimes so rigorously that it surprised others. While this may have seemed challenging at the time, it laid a strong foundation for our development.

Today, this proactive approach makes many things easier for us compared to other member states. Our commitment remains the same: to be at the forefront of security and defense, to strengthen diplomatic ties, and to work closely with our allies.

This is how I see Estonia’s role—leading by example.