AI Profiling: Kalev Stoicescu

The political position is unwaveringly focused on national security, comprehensive national defense, and aggressive deterrence, being predominantly strongly value- and policy-based. The speaker consistently supports very high defense spending (over 3% of GDP, including a security tax) and is prepared to support controversial measures, such as withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention to allow the use of anti-personnel mines, emphasizing the need to defend the country "from the very first centimeter." In foreign policy, the collective defense of NATO and the EU, robust support for Ukraine, enhanced implementation of anti-Russian sanctions, and the elimination of Kremlin influence within domestic structures are vitally important. Domestically, fiscal prudence is emphasized, populist economic decisions are criticized, and a balance is demanded between the state's tax requirements and the protection of assets necessary for citizens' lives.

The politician’s expertise is exclusively deep and concentrated in the field of national defense and security policy, ranging from NATO strategic objectives and foreign operations (ARF, SNF, Aspides) to detailed domestic budget planning, capability development, and civil defense systems. The expertise is methodologically technical and procedural, confirmed by the use of specific terminology, legal details (depositary, denunciation, CO2 auction revenue), and concrete mathematical and financial calculations. In addition to the military domain, he/she holds authority in international law, the legal nuances of sanctions implementation, and the legislative procedure of the Riigikogu, often relying on personal diplomatic experience and having repeatedly served as a rapporteur for the National Defence Committee.

The rhetorical style is predominantly formal, objective, and procedural, particularly in commission reports where the emphasis is placed on logical appeals, legislative specifics, and consensus-based decisions. Simultaneously, the tone shifts abruptly to become resolute and pressing, balancing the analytical approach with powerful moral and emotional calls in support of the national will for defense. The speaker consistently employs forceful and often aggressive metaphors, alongside extremely condemnatory terminology (e.g., "serial aggressor," "predator," "monster") when characterizing the Russian regime and security threats.

The speaker maintains a consistently intense and rhythmic pattern of activity, focused primarily on the legislative work of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament). Peak activity is observed during parliamentary sessions, particularly in February, May, June, and September. His work is characterized by a recurring and leading role as the rapporteur for the National Defence Committee, underscoring a central position in guiding security and national defence legislation. Beyond appearances at plenary sessions, his activities encompass intensive committee work, direct communication and negotiation with the executive branch (the Ministry of Defence), and participation in both major domestic exercises and international consultations and foreign missions. The speaker also demonstrates consistency in follow-up, ensuring the timely submission of written statements and responses.

The politician’s confrontational profile is dominated by intense, moral condemnation of the Russian Federation, which is branded a "serial aggressor" and "predator," and described as a revanchist and criminal dictatorship. This criticism is consistently security-focused and ideological, extending even to Russian political instruments, such as the Moscow Patriarchate, which is viewed as an FSB-infiltrated threat. Domestic political criticism is sharp, targeting both the opposition’s procedural deficiencies and earlier populist economic decisions. However, the fiercest opposition emerges when the actions of the opposition (e.g., voting against NATO collective defense) are seen as directly undermining national security.

The politician's collaboration style is strongly consensus-driven and institutionally grounded, repeatedly highlighting the unanimous decisions of the National Defense Committee and seeking broad parliamentary unity on matters of national defense. He/She is a pragmatic coalition partner who engages in constructive cooperation with the executive branch (ministries, ministers) and is prepared to make compromises to achieve strategic objectives. In this collaboration, expert opinions (such as the Chancellor of Justice) and legal correctness are highly valued, while international cooperation with NATO and EU allies and coordinated action with Nordic-Baltic neighbors is existentially vital.

The politician's focus is overwhelmingly centered on international and national security, emphasizing Nordic-Baltic cooperation and Estonia's contribution to NATO and EU global operations. Specific regional or local issues within Estonia are rare and are subordinated to national defense priorities, focusing primarily on the development of the eastern border (Southeast Estonia, Narva), military infrastructure (Nursipalu), and maritime border outposts (small islands). There is a distinct lack of focus on local economic projects or social issues that are not directly tied to security or border defense. In the broader regional context, the coordination of defense policy among neighboring countries (Finland, Poland, the Baltic states) and the security of the Baltic Sea are crucial.

The politician's economic views are dominated by a strong security focus, which justifies extraordinary and large national defense investments (at least 3–5% of GDP) and the introduction of a temporary, purpose-specific security tax. In foreign economic policy, the priority is maximizing pressure on the aggressor's economy through sanctions and the termination of all economic activity, while simultaneously supporting a new European economic model independent of Russia. Domestically, the speaker supports strict fiscal discipline, responsible budget planning, and adherence to EU rules, while remaining cautious about unreasonable expenditures and the indexation of benefits. Tax policy emphasizes fairness and limits to prevent the forced alienation of property necessary for life, while also demanding accountability for damage to critical infrastructure.

The politician’s profile concerning social issues is predominantly security-centric, dominated by the themes of civil defense and comprehensive national defense, which are considered the state’s primary tasks. Security considerations outweigh traditional civil liberties, which is manifested in the restriction of voting rights for citizens of aggressor states and the prioritization of national defense above humanitarian concerns (e.g., landmines). Freedom of religion is viewed through the prism of security, necessitating the restriction of activities of religious structures subordinate to the Kremlin and treating them as a political threat. The human rights topic is primarily focused on in the international context, criticizing Russia’s inhumanity, genocidal crimes (the deportation of Ukrainian children), and historical injustice (the Crimean Tatars).

The politician's legislative focus is predominantly aimed at strengthening national defense and security, encompassing both securing defense investments through a security tax and legislating comprehensive national defense (including civil defense and shelters) and maritime security. He has been an active leader and strong proponent of legislation responding to Russia's aggression, which includes enhancing sanctions, utilizing frozen assets for the benefit of Ukraine, denouncing the Estonian-Russian legal assistance treaty, and restricting the voting rights of citizens of aggressor states. As a significant and recurring issue, representing the National Defense Committee, he spearheaded the process of withdrawing from the Ottawa Convention prohibiting anti-personnel mines, demonstrating a willingness to make fundamental changes in the name of security.