:format(webp)/nginx/o/2024/12/27/16565558t1h6206.jpg)
Frankly, nothing in Estonia should surprise me anymore, yet I still find myself surprised—perhaps to mask my own confusion or lack of understanding, freelance journalist Kalev Vilgats writes.
Why, I ask, are our Social Democrats clinging so tightly to the idea of granting voting rights to foreign nationals in local elections? Lauri Läänemets and his followers in the Riigikogu are effectively cutting down the branch they themselves are sitting on—namely, the trust of the Estonian-speaking electorate in the Social Democratic Party (SDE). The situation becomes even stranger when they claim that stateless individuals and Russian citizens are not particularly active voters in our elections anyway. If that is true, excluding them from local elections would hardly be a significant loss. Let this be seen as the «front side» of SDE's medal for Russian support. But there is also a «flip side»: by supporting such a stance, the Social Democrats risk losing support among Estonian-speaking and Estonian citizen voters. Trying to replace the Center Party as the new representative and leader of the Russian-speaking community is a miscalculation by the Social Democrats.
Let us, for argument’s sake, accept the claim that stateless individuals and Russian citizens living permanently in Estonia are not active voters in local elections. Let us also set aside the question of who, then, has been helping certain groups maintain power in local governments for decades—groups that oppose Estonian-language education and Estonian-oriented values.
I genuinely do not know whether it is possible to see how votes cast by Russian citizens living in Estonia are distributed in Russia's State Duma or presidential elections. However, this does not change the fact that these voters have consistently supported United Russia in parliamentary elections and stood behind Vladimir Putin in presidential elections. In other words, Russian citizens residing in Estonia who support Moscow's red-imperialist policies bear shared responsibility for the events unfolding in Ukraine, Sakartvelo, Moldova, and, recently, Syria.
This brings us to the topic of collective responsibility and consequences. The least we can do is strip Russian citizens and stateless individuals of their ability to interfere in Estonian affairs. If this impacts also those who do not support Putin, so be it. During World War II, Britain interned all people of German origin, including refugees fleeing Hitler's regime.
After Pearl Harbor, the United States placed Japanese residents in internment camps, even though many had no ties to the Land of the Rising Sun beyond their names. Estonia—note this—only intends to revoke voting rights for individuals from unfriendly countries.
I have spent extended periods in Germany, and even 20 years ago, it was almost impossible to discuss the world wars with Germans, despite the presence of framed photos of officer ancestors in their homes. Such was the shame of what Hitler and his cronies had done. Meanwhile, many Russians seem to view the «Russian world»—with its accompanying economic and cultural impoverishment—as precisely what Ukrainians, Moldovans, Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Finns, and other nations formerly under imperial rule should embrace. Estonians are not inherently predisposed to hatred of Russians, despite what propagandists claim on Russian channels that slander Estonia. Those generations who experienced the so-called «paradise of nations» have largely passed away. Yet we must not forget that nothing good has ever come to us from the east—save the sunrise. Preserving historical memory is vital.
I sought support for my thoughts from respected sources. Former Supreme Court justice Rait Maruste, in an article published in Postimees (May 21, 2024), made two key points. First, the collective guilt, shame, and humiliation endured by the German people were painful but necessary, ultimately cleansing and healing society. Second, the voting rights of foreign nationals are not inalienable human rights but rather political privileges granted or withheld at the discretion of individual states.
I firmly believe there is no need to differentiate between Russian citizens and stateless individuals in the present case. Their voting rights must be revoked—not temporarily, but permanently. Even if, by some miracle, Russia were to become a normal country, this transformation would not occur within my lifetime. Voting rights should remain exclusively for Estonian citizens and citizens of European Union countries, who indeed are not particularly active voters.
It has long been clear to me that admitting mistakes is not customary in Estonian politics. The authors of our constitution seem reluctant to acknowledge that they were overly optimistic in assuming the democratic development of the world. This may explain the excessive generosity toward foreigners in granting them the right to participate in the governance of Estonia. Let us admit that we hoped for the best, yet things turned out as they usually do. It seems that the creators of the constitution viewed its text as immutable, carved in stone. But a nation's foundational document cannot be a fossil. The US Constitution, adopted on Sept. 17, 1787, and effective from March 4, 1789, has been amended 33 times, with 27 of those amendments ratified. Nothing prevents us from amending our constitution.
So, Mr. Prime Minister Kristen Michal, instead of wearing a white sweater, put on a garment emblazoned with «will to defend» and take decisive action! Voting rights for citizens only! If the Riigikogu proves incapable, a referendum would be a reasonable solution—even though Estonian politicians fear referendums like the devil fears the cross.
/nginx/o/2019/08/22/12490175t1habc9.jpg)