Agenda Profile: Anti Poolamets
First reading of the draft statement of the Riigikogu "On the Return to Ukraine of Children Deported by Russia" (375 AE)
2024-02-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Political Position
The political stance strongly supports the Riigikogu's statement regarding the return of Ukrainian children, emphasizing that this is fundamentally an issue of international law and war crimes. The speaker demands significantly more proactive engagement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and stresses the importance of parliamentary diplomacy as Estonia's contribution. The position is strongly value-driven, connecting the current situation with Russia's historical methodology of empire building.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker introduces himself as a historian, demonstrating profound knowledge of the historical methods of genocide employed by the Russian Empire (Circassia, Ingrians) and drawing parallels (the Ottoman Janissaries). He cites specific sources, such as Jaanika Merilo’s work, the OSCE report, and Peep Varju’s book, to confirm that the deportations constitute a war crime. This knowledge is widely utilized in educational efforts concerning the "unvarnished history" of Russia.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is serious and urgent, relying heavily on historical parallels and moral appeals. The speaker leverages the authority of a historian to explain Russia's methodology of genocide, emphasizing that "there is nothing new" in the current actions. He sharply criticizes the hypocritical interpretation of international law, employing emotional references to the "scars of violence" borne by Estonian society.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker stresses the necessity of active parliamentary diplomacy, which involves traveling abroad with delegations and clarifying specific issues within the format of friendship groups over the coming months. He/She also references the operational work done by others, such as Jaanika Merilo, regarding the repatriation of children, setting the goal of ensuring more vigorous action from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main adversary is Russia, which is described as an empire that historically employs the methodology of genocide and systematic destruction, and which commits war crimes through deportation and the re-education of children. The speaker also sharply criticizes countries, such as China, that interpret international law hypocritically and selectively.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The cooperation model emphasizes the need for coordinated action between domestic institutions (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) and the Riigikogu (parliamentary diplomacy, friendship groups). It also stresses the necessity of international pressure and sanctions for the return of children, urging that China's conscience also be addressed.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is predominantly international, concentrating on supporting Ukraine and explaining Russia's aggression on a global level, including outreach to China. Regional references (Estonia's home municipality, the Ingrian genocide, Circassia) are used primarily to draw historical parallels and explain the trauma experienced by Estonian society.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Central to these social issues are the consequences of the children's forced removal, involving their alienation from Ukrainian language, culture, and religion, and their subjection to military training. The speaker emphasizes that this constitutes a form of re-education turned against their own homeland, recalling the Ottoman Janissary corps. He highlights the unhealed wounds of violence in Estonian society, thereby forging an empathetic connection with the suffering of Ukraine.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on the adoption of the Riigikogu statement (draft 375 AE), which concerns the return to Ukraine of children deported by Russia. The speaker is a strong supporter of the statement and views it as a foundation for further active diplomatic action and outreach.
2 Speeches Analyzed