Agenda Profile: Mart Helme

The speaker's political position is strongly aimed at prioritizing Estonia's independent defense capability, questioning the rationale for continuing military support for Ukraine, especially considering the potential cessation of US aid. He demands a clear stance from the government on whether support for Ukraine will continue at the expense of our own defense capacity, or whether the focus will be placed on ensuring sufficient quantities of our own ammunition stocks and weaponry. Additionally, he expresses opposition to the construction of wind farms, deeming them economically unsound. The political framework is strongly performance-driven and value-based (centering on the nation's birthday and the concept of serving one's own people).

The speaker demonstrates expertise on military aid and weapon systems (such as Bradley, Abrams, and HIMARS), highlighting the differences in standards among European manufacturers. He references international sources (Russian, Ukrainian, Finnish, English) and scientifically substantiated articles concerning the costs of energy projects. The expertise also covers geopolitical analysis regarding the impact of the cessation of US support for Ukraine.

The tone is critical, demanding, and occasionally confrontational, particularly concerning the Prime Minister’s actions, which are met with a "very serious remark." The speaker utilizes logical appeals, citing international facts (the share of US aid, the withdrawal of European countries) and economic calculations (the input costs of wind parks). He stresses his informed perspective, noting that he reads Russian, Ukrainian, English, and Finnish publications to back his argument regarding Europe's inability to compensate for US aid.

The speaker is actively involved in the parliamentary debate, putting pointed questions and follow-ups to the government regarding security and economic issues. They quickly respond to current affairs, such as the anniversary of the Republic of Estonia and international reports concerning military aid packages. The pace of their speech suggests a desire to intervene immediately and demand answers from the government during critical situations.

The main criticism is directed at the Prime Minister and the government. The Prime Minister is personally criticized for leaving the country on the anniversary of the Republic of Estonia, behaving like an "official of Ukraine." Politically, the government is accused of continuing to support Ukraine at the expense of developing independent defense capabilities, which practically amounts to the disarmament of Estonia. The criticism is intense, and rather than expressing any willingness to compromise, critics are demanding a change in the government's position.

Insufficient data. The speaker's style is confrontational and demanding towards the government, focusing on sharp criticism of the government's policies and actions.

The focus is divided between Estonian national security and international security. At the national level, emphasis is placed on the importance of independent defense capability and munitions reserves. Internationally, the focus is on supporting the war in Ukraine, analyzing the role and capability of Europe (Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Hungary) and the United States.

The speaker opposes the construction of wind farms, arguing that they are not profitable when factoring in the high input costs for concrete, metal, and plastic. He/She demands a realistic calculation of these costs and cites scientifically substantiated articles that support his/her position. Overall, he/she advocates for fiscal discipline and transparent cost accounting for large-scale projects.

There is not enough data. The talks focus on security and the economy.

The speaker's focus is on shifting the government's strategic priorities within the defense sector, demanding the prioritization of independent defense capability. He emphasizes the necessity of procuring new types of weapons (drones: aerial, ground, and maritime drones) and ensuring adequate stockpiles. Specific draft laws or amendments are not mentioned; instead, the focus is on initiating and criticizing political policies and directions.