Estonian Leaders Clash Over Calls for European Talks With Putin
TALLINN, Estonia – – A public rift has emerged within Estonia’s leadership regarding potential European Union negotiations with the Kremlin, as President Alar Karis advocates for renewed diplomacy while the country’s foreign ministry expresses strong opposition. The disagreement highlights a broader division among European leaders about engaging with Moscow amid Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine.
President Karis, speaking at the World Governments Summit in Dubai, suggested that the European Union should appoint a special envoy to participate in talks with Russia aimed at ending the conflict. “The European Union should also be involved in these discussions,” Karis said, according to reports. “Although we are not fighting Russia directly, we have supported Ukraine for many years already and will continue to do so.” He argued that Europe had been slow to engage diplomatically, stating, “We should have a say as well, but as you can see, we are a little late… A couple of years ago, we were in a situation where we did not speak to aggressors and now we are concerned that we are not at the table.” Karis did not specify potential candidates for the envoy role, but indicated they should come from a major European country and possess credibility with both sides.
However, Karis’s call for dialogue was swiftly rebuffed by Estonia’s foreign ministry and Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna, who cautioned that engaging the Kremlin at this time would be detrimental to Ukraine and provide a propaganda win for Vladimir Putin. This unusually public dispute underscores the sensitivity surrounding any potential negotiations with Russia.
The debate isn’t confined to Estonia. Latvia’s Prime Minister Evika Siliņa echoed Karis’s sentiment, supporting the appointment of a European envoy, but emphasized the importance of coordinating any engagement with Moscow with Kyiv and maintaining existing sanctions against Russia. “In my view, diplomacy is necessary. Dialogue is always necessary, but at the same time we must isolate Russia and maintain sanctions,” Siliņa stated.
In contrast, Lithuania firmly opposes renewing political dialogue with Russia. This divergence in opinion among the Baltic states – Estonia and Latvia leaning towards potential talks, while Lithuania resists – reveals a significant split in regional strategy.
The disagreement within Estonia is particularly noteworthy, as foreign policy is typically determined by the government, not the president, who holds a largely ceremonial role. The swift and direct response from the foreign ministry to Karis’s remarks demonstrates the strength of the opposition to engaging with the Kremlin.
The broader European landscape reflects a similar division. EU leaders remain split on whether to resume direct talks with Putin, with concerns that such a move could be interpreted as a weakening of resolve in supporting Ukraine. Estonian Foreign Minister Tsahkna specifically warned against attempting dialogue with the Kremlin, suggesting it could legitimize Putin’s actions.
Looking ahead, the Institute for Defence Studies (ICDS) suggests Estonia should avoid taking a rigid stance against any engagement with Moscow, arguing that dismissing such engagement as inherently wrong or dangerous could be counterproductive. This perspective highlights the complex considerations facing European leaders as they navigate the ongoing conflict and search for potential pathways to peace.
The core of the disagreement centers on whether dialogue with Russia is possible or productive given the Kremlin’s track record of disregarding international norms and agreements. Critics argue that Russia’s actions demonstrate a rejection of fundamental principles such as respecting borders, honoring agreements, and upholding the meaning of words, making meaningful negotiation impossible.
