Agenda Profile: Vladimir Arhipov
First reading of the Draft Resolution of the Riigikogu "Making a Proposal to the Government of the Republic to Close the Temporary Control Line Between the Republic of Estonia and the Russian Federation" (722 OE)
2025-11-11
XV Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
Political Position
The political position is one of strong opposition to the draft bill concerning the closure of the control line, which is regarded as an irresponsible political slogan rather than statesmanlike strategic leadership. The speaker stresses that decisions must take into account the lives of actual people and humanitarian considerations, not just ideological posturing here in this chamber. The stance is strongly policy- and value-driven, emphasizing the necessity of foresight and inclusion.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates competence in border policy and regional representation, citing the decision of the Seto Congress and referencing the Ministry of Internal Affairs' stance that there is no need to close the border. The argument is supported by international examples (the Poland-Kaliningrad border, Norway) concerning border management in NATO countries. Furthermore, the importance of ensuring strategic security (intelligence, allies) is emphasized over physical closure.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical and admonitory, contrasting emotional slogans with strategic management and foresight. Both emotional appeals (graves, families, punishment) and logical arguments (economic impact assessment, international comparisons) are employed. The tone is formal and analytical, focusing on procedural and humanitarian deficiencies.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is an active participant in the debate, presenting one comprehensive rebuttal and two questions focused on the procedural deficiencies of the draft bill and the required reports. This pattern of activity indicates a focus on scrutinizing the quality of the bill's preparation and stakeholder engagement.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is directed at the initiators of the draft bill, who are criticized for prioritizing political slogans at the expense of actual people's lives. The criticism is primarily procedural (lack of inclusion, absence of an impact assessment) and political, accusing the initiators of punishing the people of Estonia due to their geography. Instead of compromise, they demand the rejection of the bill or its return for thorough amendment.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The collaborative style emphasizes the need to involve the groups most affected by the decision in the decision-making process, especially the 30,000 representatives of Setomaa. The speaker demands that Riigikogu decisions must begin with talking to the border residents, not with informing them after the fact. Information regarding cooperation with other Riigikogu factions is lacking.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is strongly regional, concentrating on the interests and concerns of the residents of Setomaa, Petserimaa, and other border areas (including Narva). Humanitarian considerations are stressed, such as access to properties, the elderly, and ancestors' graves on the other side of the control line. The decision of the Seto Congress is cited as an important source of local representation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The speaker is calling for an economic impact assessment to be conducted to analyze the consequential damages incurred by border residents and businesses resulting from the closure of the control line. A cautious stance is being maintained regarding decisions that could negatively affect the economy without prior analysis.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Among social issues, humanitarian considerations and the rights of Estonian citizens in border areas are prioritized, specifically those whose families, graves, and properties are located on the other side of the control line. The need to avoid punishing people based on their geographical location is stressed, as is the importance of ensuring that the voices of local residents are heard.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on opposing Draft Bill 722 OE and returning it for comprehensive amendment until all impacts have been assessed and public consultations have been held. The priority is procedural correctness, requiring the completion of an economic impact assessment and mandatory consultation with representatives of Setomaa.
3 Speeches Analyzed