Session Profile: Aleksei Jevgrafov

The political position is strongly opposed to closing the border, deeming Isamaa’s corresponding draft legislation populist and pointless, as the security situation does not necessitate such measures. The primary focus areas are the practical issues of border management (queues, throughput capacity) and the humanitarian consequences for residents of border regions. The speaker’s stance is policy-driven, relying on the former Minister of the Interior’s previous statements, which refute the arguments concerning migration pressure. Furthermore, steps that escalate tensions are opposed, such as campaigns targeting the MPEÕK and the revocation of voting rights.

The speaker demonstrates detailed expertise regarding the logistics and customs control procedures at the Narva border crossing, highlighting specific data concerning the reduction in throughput capacity and the resulting overload of bus passengers. The analysis focuses on the bottlenecks in border management, explaining how full customs control has halved the throughput and generated long queues. Reference is also made to previous decisions and assessments by the Ministry of the Interior (for example, the closure of Narva 2).

The rhetorical style is critical and analytical, employing detailed descriptions (waiting for hours in the rain and snow) to create a humanitarian appeal. The style is formal, yet it includes sharp attacks against opponents, labeling the Isamaa bill a populist maneuver intended solely to gain extra attention. The logical arguments are based on highlighting contrasting security claims (Läänemets vs. Isamaa).

The patterns of activity demonstrate active participation in plenary sessions, involving both the posing of specific questions regarding the consequences of draft legislation (such as property in Russia) and the delivery of long, detailed rebuttals. The speaker focuses on highlighting existing problems (like the queues in Narva) and advocating for alternative solutions.

The primary opposition is aimed at the Isamaa party and Urmas Reinsalu, whose bill to close the border is being labeled as pointless and populist—a measure that achieves absolutely nothing. There is also significant criticism directed at former Minister of the Interior Lauri Läänemets for blaming Narva residents for necessitating customs control, while completely ignoring arguments concerning migration pressure and hybrid threats. The opposition is intense and politically motivated, with opponents being accused of escalating the tension.

The speaker refers to the failed attempts to find backing for their practical suggestions, such as organizing customs control for bus passengers in Sillamäe or shifting the queue under cover. This demonstrates that the offers of cooperation made to the Ministry of the Interior or other political parties regarding border problem resolution have not found support.

The regional focus is strongly directed at Narva and, more broadly, Ida-Virumaa, emphasizing the daily lives and humanitarian issues faced by local residents. Specific attention is also drawn to the family ties and the graves of loved ones in Russia belonging to residents of Narva and other border towns, as well as Estonian citizens residing in Petserimaa.

The economic implications were only briefly touched upon, noting that legal trade continues despite the sanctions. The fact that border throughput capacity has been halved due to full customs control points to concerns regarding logistical obstacles and the slowing down of trade.

Regarding social issues, emphasis is placed on the humanitarian problems that arise from the severing of family ties when the border is closed. The opportunity for Russians who do not support Putin’s policies to flee to Estonia or elsewhere in Europe is also defended. The speaker opposes steps that escalate tensions in Ida-Virumaa, such as campaigns against the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate.

The speaker is primarily opposed to Isamaa’s border closure bill, deeming it unnecessary and populist. Furthermore, administrative and legislative changes are being advocated for, such as reopening the Narva 2 pedestrian crossing point for people holding residence permits and for Estonian citizens, specifically to shorten wait times. The question of the bill’s potential impact on the real estate owned by Estonian citizens in Russia is also being raised.