Defence is the primal, primeval function of a state (and of any village community, in fact). The basic issue is: how to strike a balance between civil checks and defence activities? In this parliamentary Estonia of ours, as errors surface, inquisitive eyes should turn towards the Riigikogu and security authorities supervisory committee. We expect answers with substance. And we can’t help but ask, who will answer for possible faults in the system.
Four Estonian intelligence cadres are under suspicion of crime. See how the comments by Prime Minister, defence minister, and other politicians revolve around the issue if the message may be interpreted as good or bad – the case is bad, its discovery good.
Even with traitors found out, we have heard it harped that it (i.e. the discovery) shows the strength of Estonia. On a platter, we are offered the question and then the option of two answers (good/bad). In their moral assessment towards treason, thievery or corruption, politicians might just as well stand as one; let’s notice, however, that the questions are not limited to the above.
For starters: allegedly, it is the custom (in many large nations) to solve crimes in intelligence and counter-intelligence so that the public will never even know. Now, asking why Estonia has recently had numerous cases of treason (or at least things criminal) in classified agencies come public, at least theoretically we ought to consider several interpretations. Not totally excluded that like offences have been discovered before – they just never became public (for whatever reason).
