Session Profile: Mart Helme
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, press briefing.
2024-11-20
Political Position
The most prominent topic is the constitutional amendments concerning the voting rights of non-citizens, which the speaker strongly opposes, deeming it an action serving the interests of the Kremlin and a security risk. The political position is firmly value-based, stressing the protection of Estonian independence and opposition to all Russian influence. The speaker emphasizes their previous contribution to Estonian security, citing participation in the negotiations for the withdrawal of Russian troops. These positions are delivered through intense opposition and accusations.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge of the history of the restoration of Estonian independence (the withdrawal of Russian troops) and topics of constitutional law, especially concerning the voting rights of non-citizens. The argumentation relies on political projection and the emphasis of security risks, highlighting the decrease in the number of gray passport holders as the reason why the constitutional amendment is unnecessary and dangerous. Reference is also made to the Nordica case as an example of the opposing side's economic failure.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The speaker’s style is extremely confrontational and aggressive, using direct personal insults ("to the arrogant jerk," "bankruptcy maestro") and threats ("I’d honestly just punch them in the nose"). Dramatic hypothetical scenarios (e.g., voting Putin in as prime minister) are employed as an emotional appeal to underscore the danger. The speech is low-formality and focuses on accusing opponents of putting on "propaganda shows" while simultaneously demanding answers.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speech was delivered during the Riigikogu information hour, which points to active participation in parliamentary sessions and holding the government's actions accountable. The speaker references earlier involvement in the Estonian delegation during the negotiations concerning the withdrawal of Russian forces. No other regular patterns of activity are evident from the speeches.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary confrontation is directed against the ruling coalition and specific ministers, who are accused of serving Kremlin interests and lacking the capacity for critical thought. The criticism is intense and personal, ranging from political incompetence (Nordica) to endangering national security. Secondarily, the Social Democrats (SDE) are criticized for allegedly wishing to live according to the laws of the Estonian SSR.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
There are no signs of cooperation; the speech is purely confrontational and demands an answer to the question of why the government wants to maintain Russian influence. The speaker shows no openness to compromise, but instead demands that the opponents cease their activities.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is heavily placed on the national and international level, addressing the Estonian Constitution and Russia's influence operations. Narva is briefly mentioned in connection with the alleged positions of the coalition partners regarding the laws of the Estonian SSR.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic positions are confined solely to criticizing the government's handling of the Nordica bankruptcy, specifically accusing the opposition of incompetence and labeling them the "architect of bankruptcy." Broader stances on taxes, spending, or regulations are entirely absent.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The main social issue is the voting rights of non-citizens, which is addressed solely in the context of national security and foreign influence. The speaker strongly opposes amending the constitution, fearing that this would allow Russia to influence election results in the future.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
Legislative attention is currently focused on opposing a government-initiated constitutional amendment regarding the voting rights of non-citizens. The speaker is a fierce opponent of this specific bill, accusing its initiators of acting in the interests of the Kremlin.
2 Speeches Analyzed