By Plenary Sessions: Meelis Kiili

The political stance is one of strong support for Estonia’s participation in classic UN peacekeeping operations (UNIFIL), emphasizing Estonia’s contribution as a UN member state to ensuring security in crisis areas. This position is clearly policy- and commitment-driven, focusing on the maintenance of international security. Support is given for continued participation by up to three active servicemen in Lebanon.

The political position is strongly focused on national defense and deterrence. The speaker firmly supports withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention to provide the Defense Forces with additional capabilities for Estonia's military defense. This stance is justified by the need to deter an enemy that employs brutal weapons, and it is framed by core values (a free and sovereign state). In the speaker's assessment, Estonia has neither the time nor the territory to concede.

The political focus is on national defense and the protection of vital infrastructure against the real threat posed by the eastern neighbor. The speaker strongly supports amending the Defense Forces Organization Act to grant the Defense Forces additional law enforcement and military powers. He/She emphasizes the need to shift from reaction (updating laws) to proactive measures (staying ahead of the curve).

The political focus is squarely on protecting vital underwater infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, stressing the urgent need for legal enforcement to counter ongoing damage. The speaker strongly backs granting the Defense Forces the necessary authority to intervene and safeguard these cables and pipelines. This is a stance framed heavily around political and security concerns, demanding immediate action.

The political focus is on national defense and its structure. The speaker criticizes the long-term consequences of the administrative domain, particularly the removal of key functions from the Commander of the Defense Forces, which has led to the creation of a civilian agency instead of a military one. He demands a swift and fair solution and a comprehensive approach to the problem, pointing out that the current discussion is merely a small piece of the overall mosaic.

The speaker strongly supports the national defense bill, deeming it necessary from both a security and national defense perspective. His/Her position is policy-driven and focuses on strengthening national defense, supporting the general principles of the draft legislation.

The most important issue is the continuation of the contribution of Estonian defense forces personnel to the UN international peacekeeping operation UNIFIL, which is strongly and consensually supported. The position is focused on policy and procedure, emphasizing the continuity of fulfilling international defense obligations. The political objective is to conclude the second reading of the draft bill and submit it for the final vote.

The politician stresses strong support for Estonia's participation in international peacekeeping operations (UNIFIL), viewing it as a contribution to collective security and an obligation of a UN member state. This stance is policy-driven, focusing on ensuring stability in crisis regions, particularly the Middle East. He/she supports the continued involvement of the Estonian Defence Forces with up to three active personnel.

The political focus centers on national defense and the strategic deepening of the allied presence in Estonia. The speaker supports long-term agreements for the allies but stresses the need for a more ambitious approach, one that would involve including families and integrating the allied personnel into the regional economy. This position is policy-driven and aimed at expanding the long-term strategy.

The political stance heavily emphasizes national defense and the strengthening of the Defense League (KL). The speaker strongly supports the amendments to the KL law, viewing them as a small step toward serving a greater national interest. There is implicit but clear criticism directed at the officialdom for failing to grasp the essence of the KL and applying flawed funding logic. This criticism targets the lack of management competence and social maturity among the top executives in the administrative sector.

The political focus is centered on the correctness of legislative procedures, specifically regarding whether the amendments to the bill, initiated by the National Defense Committee, followed the proper process. The stance is procedurally skeptical and demands strict adherence to the rule of law. The concern over whether the draft legislation was returned to the initiating committee's session is absent, which suggests a framework driven primarily by political considerations.

The political focus is strongly on national defense and security, concentrating on amending the Defense League Act and the Firearms Act. The speaker emphasizes political consensus and a cross-party approach to national defense issues, considering this to be consistent with the principles of the Defense League. This position is heavily policy- and procedure-driven, with the aim of making the draft bill better and clearer.

The political stance heavily focuses on the strategic planning of national security and comprehensive national defense. The speaker strongly advocates for the development of a state grand strategy, or security strategy, that would encompass all sectors, not just military and internal security. This position is strongly policy- and value-driven, emphasizing the critical importance of a holistic strategy.

The political focus is placed on national security and the resilience of energy infrastructure. The speaker supports large and efficient electricity grids and a functioning market system, but strongly underscores the necessity of establishing a contingency plan (Plan B) in case of the threat of attack on subsea cables due to the aggression of the eastern neighbor.

The political focus is on education, which is treated as a shared responsibility between the state and local authorities. The speaker supports the minister's negotiations with local governments but strongly emphasizes the need to prevent municipalities from abusing state support measures to secure additional resources. The stance is policy-driven, focusing on the efficiency of implementation and risk mitigation.

The political focus is heavily directed toward foreign and security policy, emphasizing the effectiveness of sanctions against Russia. The politician advocates for an active and nuanced foreign policy that would include strategic engagement with the BRIC countries (India, Brazil, South Africa) to prevent the circumvention of sanctions. The stance is value-based, emphasizing the need to utilize both positive engagement and tools of pressure (the "carrot and stick tactic").