Session Profile: Aleksei Jevgrafov
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
2024-06-11
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to the declaration concerning Georgia, arguing that it creates tension and damages good relations. This stance is value-based, specifically questioning Estonia’s moral authority to lecture other countries, while implying that things might not be functioning perfectly within Estonia itself. The primary focus remains the criticism of foreign policy consequences and diplomatic hyperactivity.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge regarding the history of Estonian-Georgian relations and the diplomatic consequences of international statements. The expertise also focuses on legislative procedure, inquiring about the discussions held in the committee and the positions of other European Union countries. There are no references to the use of technical terms or statistics.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical and questioning, employing rhetorical questions to challenge the moral justification and necessity of the statement. The tone is direct and focuses on logical arguments concerning international precedent and Estonia’s position. Light irony is used, referencing Estonia being at the forefront "as always."
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Two brief interventions were observed during the plenary session, suggesting active participation in questioning the rapporteurs. The pattern of activity indicates a focus on scrutinizing international statements and their procedural handling. Broader data regarding the frequency or rhythm of appearances is not available.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The confrontation is aimed at the initiators of the statement, criticizing their diplomatic strategy and their justification for creating tensions with Georgia. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, raising questions about the lack of international coordination. The intensity of the attack is moderate, expressed in the form of questions and calling the underlying premises into doubt.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker referenced colleagues who share concerns regarding the straining of relations with Georgia, suggesting cooperation among parliamentarians who hold similar views. There is no information available regarding openness to compromises or cross-party cooperation on this particular issue. The cooperation style appears to be primarily intra-factional.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is international, centered on relations between Estonia and Georgia and Estonia's role within the context of the European Union. Emphasis is placed on the need to determine whether other EU member states have issued a similar statement, which demonstrates an interest in international coordination.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The data is insufficient. Although the speaker implies that things might not be working smoothly in Estonia, it is not specified which social problems are being referred to.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on challenging a specific foreign policy statement and scrutinizing the procedure surrounding it. The speaker is acting as an adversary, demanding clarifications regarding the debates that took place within the committee and the international coordination efforts.
2 Speeches Analyzed