By Agendas: Meelis Kiili

The political stance is one of strong support for Estonia's participation in UNIFIL, the classic UN peacekeeping operation in Lebanon, emphasizing Estonia's obligation as a UN member state to contribute to ensuring security in crisis regions. The position is policy-driven, focusing on the fulfillment of international commitments and the historical background of the operation. Estonia's contribution (up to three active military personnel) is moderate but consistent.

The political position focuses heavily on national defense and deterrence, offering firm support for the draft resolution (642 SE) concerning withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention. The official stance is that Estonia must retain the ability to utilize all necessary means, including landmines, to prevent aggression from its eastern neighbor. This approach is pragmatic and security-driven, emphasizing that the highest art of war is winning the conflict without fighting battles. This policy is strongly geared toward enhancing the nation's defense capabilities and preserving its sovereignty.

The political focus is heavily on national defense and strengthening maritime security against the real threat posed by the eastern neighbor. The speaker supports the adoption of the bill (565 SE) to grant the Defense Forces additional capabilities for protecting vital infrastructure, framing this support as stemming from a security policy necessity. At the same time, however, he criticizes the legislature for being reactive, stressing the need to get ahead of the curve.

The political stance is strongly supportive of strengthening the protection of critical subsea infrastructure and granting the necessary authorities to the Defence Forces. Rapid entry into force of the legislation is emphasized, citing the ongoing damage to infrastructure in the Baltic Sea. The approach is clearly policy-driven and focuses on ensuring national defense and security. The objective is to grant the Defence Forces the powers required for the protection of underwater infrastructure.

The political stance is strongly tied to legislation concerning national defense and military service. One speaker emphasizes the significance of the issue, the necessity for a swift and equitable solution, and raises the question of gender inclusion within the context of reserve personnel. The second speaker adopts a sharply critical posture, framing the draft bill under consideration as the result of long-standing structural errors within the government sector, which have led to the stripping of key functions from the Commander of the Defense Forces. This position is geared toward systemic reform and is strongly policy-driven.

The speaker strongly supports the general principles of the draft legislation (565 SE) aimed at enhancing maritime security, considering it essential for both security and national defense. Their position is rooted in policy and security concerns, focusing specifically on strengthening national defense. The strength of this position is assessed as moderate to strong, given that the committee supports the bill by consensus.

The political stance strongly supports the continued contribution of Estonian defense forces personnel to the UN peacekeeping operation UNIFIL in Lebanon. This position is policy-driven, centering on fulfilling Estonia's international obligations and extending the mandate for the use of the defense forces. The strong support is evidenced by the swift and consensual processing of the draft resolution.

The political position is strongly supportive of the participation of the Estonian Defence Forces in the UN peacekeeping operation UNIFIL in Lebanon. This stance is framed as Estonia’s obligation as a UN member state to contribute to collective security and stability in crisis regions. The focus is on the security policy framework and the fulfillment of international obligations.

The political position is heavily focused on national defense and strategic security, supporting the long-term presence of allies in Estonia. The speaker calls for greater ambition regarding the deeper integration of allies into Estonian society and economy, drawing comparisons between Estonia’s current approach and those adopted by Poland, Lithuania, and Finland. This stance is policy-driven, centered on the implementation of the long-term strategy "Estonia 2035."

The political position strongly supports amendments to the Defense League Act, with the goal of making the organization more flexible, deployable, and resilient. Criticism is directed toward the ministry bureaucracy, which has failed to understand the nature of the Defense League and exerts excessive control over it, emphasizing the necessity of changing the logic of funding. This stance is policy-driven, focusing on the fundamental question of management and planning within national defense.

The political position centers on the procedural correctness of the legislative process, questioning the legality of directing the draft bill between the initiator (the National Defence Committee) and the committee handling the proceedings. They maintain a moderate, procedural, and legal framework while seeking clarification. The objective is to ensure that the processing of amendments is compliant with the requirements.

The political stance is strongly oriented toward supporting national defense and security, emphasizing the importance of amending the Defense League Law. The speaker stresses the need for cross-party consensus and the interests of national defense, prioritizing the substance of the policy and the efficiency of the procedure. He assesses the achieved outcome as "close to ideal," noting that the best solutions were found, rather than mere compromises.

The most crucial topic is the strategic planning of national defense, with strong support being given to the establishment of a comprehensive security strategy, or the "state's grand strategy." The political stance favors a broad approach encompassing all six pillars, criticizing a narrow focus solely on the military and internal defense aspects. This position is fundamentally policy- and strategy-driven.

The political focus is on energy security and infrastructure resilience, which is strongly tied to geopolitical threats. The speaker supports efficient, large-scale power grids and a functioning market system, but urgently calls for alternative solutions (Plan B) to be in place in the event of an attack on subsea cables. This position is strongly framed around policy and security concerns.

The political position is strongly focused on supporting education, emphasizing its importance (the "key to the future") and the shared responsibility of the state and local authorities. The emphasis is placed on the integrity of policy implementation, particularly in preventing the misuse of state support measures.

The political focus is heavily centered on foreign policy and security, particularly the ability to circumvent Russian sanctions. The speaker advocates a proactive, multifaceted diplomatic strategy that incorporates the BRIC nations (India, Brazil, South Africa), utilizing both positive engagement and pressure tactics (the "carrot and stick" approach). The framework itself is strongly policy- and value-driven, concentrating on the analysis of threat definition (the adversary's intent and capabilities).