Editorial: who are the quislings, in Estonia?

Photo: Urmas Nemvalts

Edgar Savisaar, Mayor of Tallinn, did have the chance to not utter his views regarding Russian aggression and other events to do with Ukraine. He did have the chance to limit himself to a hazy statement like «the situation is worrisome» or at least be quiet. Why does he have to promptly approve Putin’s war propaganda? Why did he almost perfectly mimic the Kremlin position, as presented by Vitali Churkin, Russian permanent representative to the United Nations? What makes the mayor of a European city talk the talk that repeats Putin’s self-justifications after his recent aggression?

Why on earth did Edgar Savisaar have to place himself in a situation where he’s but a pawn in Russian war propaganda, far from the definition of an independent politician? True: for years, he’s grown accustomed to repeating, in his own interests, the messages that a large part of his voters are accustomed to hear from Kremlin’s propaganda channels. Still, as an experienced politician, he had to have understood how his message was going to be used.

According to Mr Savisaar, it is the new Ukrainian government that is illegal – the one appointed by Ukrainian parliament elected in times of Mr Yanukovych. Mr Savisaar goes as far as to declare: «Alas, the Ukrainian government formed according to the diktat of baton-wielding bullies has neither the mandate nor the capability even to organise free elections.»

A reminder: the whole idea of separation of powers does rest on the goal that no branch of power should be able to become plenipotentiary by itself.

The aim of the «machinery» also being that if a representative of one branch of power crosses a line, clearly going against the will of the people, the others are under obligation to step in and restore the workings of the «mechanism».

During the Yanukovych times, Ukrainian administration formally mimicked separation of powers; in essence, it was far from it. Even so: even the parliament with his own party in majority decided to turn the state ship, once it became obvious that there were no longer any options to keep kleptocracy – the power of thieves – going. As Yanukovych fled and the people of Ukraine saw the super-expensive silliness the man had amassed in his so-called private domain, it became explicitly clear why he had no option to accommodate the initial demands of Maidan. Any honest power to follow would have dragged the blatant thievery to the limelight.

Mr Savisaar is used to give hazy answers. Due to his manipulations, he’s used to the idea that for journalists, just to get an interview with him is supposed to be a huge compliment.

In a curious way, the fugitive Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych and Edgar Savisaar do have this in common: both have pocketed unbelievable honorariums for books not yet published. Whence the money? No clear answer from neither. 

Naturally, our eyes are riveted to how Estonia gets its new coalition.