MIKK SALU ⟩ National defense and panic go hand in hand in Estonia

Photo: Mihkel Maripuu / Postimees

• The Government Office's monitoring survey shows a growth in negative trends in public opinion.
• Estonia is investing more in defense, but faith in Estonia's defense is decreasing.
• Neither politicians nor the media can talk about security without causing anxiety.

So far, no top Estonian politician has found a formula for talking about security in a way that makes people calmer and more determined, rather than more nervous and fearful, journalist Mikk Salu writes.

«Residents belief in the security of the Estonian state is at its lowest level in recent years in March. Belief in the security of the Estonian state is lower among Estonians (36 percent), which is the lowest figure in recent years,» such sentences are written in the March public opinion monitoring survey of the Government Office. This is a traditional public opinion survey commissioned by the Government Office every few months. It is an important tool with which Stenbock House also organizes its communication.

The picture is bad. The people of Estonia are anxious, nervous and worried. Looking at the survey as a whole, nothing good stands out. Different questions and different answers, but the trends are at best "good that it hasn't gotten worse" or at worst show an increase in negativity.

When will the war start, will we have a war? These are the types of questions that friends, relatives and acquaintances have asked me as a journalist on several occasions. When you talk to government communications people, they admit that the same questions feature in their daily work. Both answering them and analyzing how to make and communicate security policy in a way that does not alarm citizens.

Similarly, Estonia or some other Eastern European country has become a standard example with which to intimidate. Saturday's edition of Postimees featured a story about the book "If Russia Wins: A Scenario" by German international relations professor Carlo Masala, the content of which, briefly, is as follows: in three years Russia will take Narva and Kärdla. Written for a German audience in the German context, it still manages to scare Estonians in a roundabout way as well.

Combining should theoretically be possible. You contribute everything necessary to national defense, but at the same time you do it with a calmness that builds confidence.

Germans aside, so far no top Estonian politician has found a formula to talk about security in a way that would make people calmer and more determined, rather than more nervous and more afraid. Because in an ideal world Estonia would do everything it needs to do – invest in defense, help Ukraine, deal with shelters, whatever –, but this would come without a background of anxiety. Investing in security is necessary, there is hardly any serious argument against it, but how to do it in a way that faith in the defense of the Estonian state would grow, not diminish, that is the question.

Combining should theoretically be possible. You contribute everything necessary to national defense, but at the same time you do it with a calmness that builds confidence. This is how it is in Finland. This is more or less how it is in Sweden too. Or, to give more distant examples: Singapore, a small country in a similarly complex geopolitical location, has been investing 5 percent of its gross domestic product in defense for decades, and this creates security, not social anxiety. Not to mention Israel. They may brawl about domestic politics with abandon, but when it comes to security, they are calm, united and determined.

When asking some colleagues at Postimees why it is that Estonia as a society cannot create security or talk about security without making people anxious, in comparison with Finland, for example, it is thought that the issue lies in the historical experience of the two nations. Estonians have a trauma that Finns do not have. Finns can lay mines against the Russian border and build shelters – which they have been doing for decades anyway – but all of this comes about routinely, boringly and calmly.

But there are probably more reasons. Estonian media (this applies to all publications) is by nature more dramatic and emotional than that of the Nordic countries. A high-ranking Estonian government official described his media consumption in an interview some time ago. He read several pages in a newspaper about shelters and learned that if a bomb falls 200 meters away, you lose an arm, if it falls 100 meters away, you lose arms and legs, that people aged 50 and older run to shelters at 0.7 meters per second and younger people at 1.2 meters per second. Of course, this is presented in an ironic tone, but the point is (without denying that the topic is, of course, necessary) that the feeling after reading that was anything but good and calm.

This is a kind of social pedagogy, where the search is on for the "right" dose of anxiety that can motivate society.

Estonian politicians are likely also harsher in their statements. And if someone says something harsh, the next politician is motivated to say something even harsher in order to get in the picture. In addition, some people involved in defense also have the attitude that since Estonia has underinvested in defense for 20 years, we now have to strike while the iron is hot, because otherwise we will suddenly lose momentum and put our feet up. In a recent conversation with an official, he also mentioned the need to maintain a certain level of anxiety. Because we have to somehow justify why we have to invest so much in defense, because we have to somehow entice people to join Kaitseliit, because we have to somehow make people think about whether they have enough matches and water at home. In short, a certain social pedagogy, where the search is on for the "right" dose of anxiety that can motivate society.

Possible, but is it convincing? Only 36 percent of Estonians believe in the security of the Estonian state – according to the Government Office’s own data – and the trend is rather downward, so by what logic could this be considered a good trend? Politicians and officials actually know this. They are also racking their brains over it. Here and there, they have also tried to experiment with how it would be possible to find a better balance. I remember President Alar Karis, who at times has been very belligerent in his words and then again: «We talk too much about war.» One cannot see into the president’s head, but if I had to guess, he also struggles with the same question – how to talk about security in a way that does the job but doesn’t sow anxiety.

Again, the question is not whether we should contribute to defense, nor whether we should talk about it. In both cases, the answer is «yes».​ But if some political party or politician learned to do it, in a good way, differently than now, there would be much to be gained.

PS. The latest monitoring survey by the Government Office paints a really bad picture of the state of affairs. Faith in Estonia's security is decreasing. Worries and stress are increasing. Even to the question «do you feel that you belong to Estonian society,» the proportion of Estonians who respond «completely agree» has fallen from 79 percent to 51 percent in two and a half years.