AI Profiling: Aleksandr Tšaplõgin

The political position throughout the entire observed period (January 2024–June 2025) has been consistently and forcefully oppositional, focusing on fierce criticism of the government's fiscal policy and economic incompetence. A central theme is the opposition to tax hikes (especially the car tax, excise duties, and the taxation of pensions), which is framed as social injustice. This stance emphasizes the need to protect low- and middle-income citizens while simultaneously demanding higher taxation for the wealthy (e.g., banks). The framework of this position is strongly value- and results-based, accusing the government of perpetuating the economic recession, highlighting the detrimental nature of the green transition, and undermining national security and interests. Concurrently, the position resists state intervention in matters concerning the church and private life.

The politician's expertise is clearly focused on fiscal and tax policy. He demonstrates a deep understanding of the socio-economic impact of various taxes (such as VAT, excess profit tax, and excise duties) and consistently proposes alternative solutions. Another strong area is energy and infrastructure. Here, he provides detailed analyses of the speculative nature of the Nord Pool exchange, the role of oil shale, and the viability of the Rail Baltic project, backing his positions with technical and financial data. To support his arguments, he regularly utilizes specific numerical data (e.g., bank profits, price spreads, social expenditures) and references the experiences of economists, the Chancellor of Justice, and other European nations. Beyond economic matters, he possesses detailed knowledge of Riigikogu procedures, the technical aspects of e-voting, and even specific cultural or canonical issues.

The politician's rhetorical style is consistently combative, aggressive, and sharply critical, maintaining a passionate and accusatory tone throughout the entire period. The most characteristic rhetorical device is the intense use of sharp and direct rhetorical questions, which repeatedly call into question the government's motives, logic, and moral legitimacy. Although the speaker operates within a formal parliamentary setting, they combine logical and economic arguments (statistics, data) with powerful emotional and moral appeals, focusing on social injustice and poverty. The style is polarizing, repeatedly employing strong and condemnatory phrases such as "robbery," "suicide policy," and historical parallels (Bolsheviks).

The speaker's activity pattern throughout the entire observed period (2024–2025) has been exceptionally intense and consistent, focusing almost exclusively on participating in Riigikogu sessions, often speaking nearly every session day. The pace of activity remains consistently high, with the primary focus being holding the government accountable through questions, interpellations, and faction bills. In addition to substantive criticism (economy, taxes, social policy), the speaker demonstrates a consistent interest in the organization of Riigikogu work, repeatedly raising procedural questions and reacting quickly to political crises and scandals. This pattern confirms the speaker's role in the Riigikogu chamber as an extremely visible and vocal opposition figure who constantly demands concrete answers.

The opposition's stance throughout the entire observed period has been extremely intense and uncompromising, directed primarily at the government, the Prime Minister (Kaja Kallas), and the Reform Party, but also at the other coalition partners (SDE, Eesti 200). The criticism is wide-ranging, encompassing both political failures (economic recession, tax hikes, unfair budget priorities) and sharp ethical and personal accusations (lying, corruption, security risks related to business dealings with Russia). The opposition consistently accuses the government of incompetence and robbing the poor in the name of protecting rich sponsors or bankers, often demanding a complete change in policy or the immediate resignation of the government.

The style of cooperation is almost exclusively intra-factional, focusing on the consistent presentation of the Centre Party's alternative proposals (such as a bank tax or changes to tax policy) and the recognition of colleagues' contributions. The politician's position is predominantly strongly oppositional and confrontational, manifesting in sharp criticism of the government and proposals to reject draft legislation. There is a lack of systematic openness to cross-party compromise or mediation, although a willingness to seek cross-factional support has been demonstrated on isolated social issues. Consequently, cooperation is characteristic only of the party's inner circle, remaining externally uncompromising.

The politician's focus is predominantly national, primarily addressing economic and tax policy, but the regional dimension remains consistently important, often serving to illustrate the negative impacts of national policies. Specific regional attention has been split between rural areas (the effects of car taxation, the systemic decline of agriculture, and supporting local producers) and the Ida-Virumaa energy sector (oil shale, maintenance of the Narva power plants). Furthermore, specific local issues have been highlighted, ranging from funding the social services sector in Kanepi municipality to high heating bills in peripheral regions (Narva-Jõesuu, Loksa), alongside criticism of Tallinn's infrastructure and the actions of the city government. The regional focus consistently underscores concerns regarding the cost of living and the ability to make ends meet outside the capital.

The politician's economic views are characterized by a strong emphasis on social justice and redistribution, which is manifested in categorical opposition to regressive consumption taxes (VAT, excise duties, car tax) and the demand to introduce a progressive income tax and a windfall tax on banks. The main fiscal policy goal is shifting the tax burden onto the wealthy and restoring economic growth, while opposing tax hikes during a recession, as these curb growth and disproportionately affect the poor. Regarding cuts, there is a demand for reducing state bureaucracy and ending the financing of inefficient large projects (Rail Baltic) and green energy subsidies, in order to redirect funds toward social spending. Although the politician favors a market economy and fair competition, especially in the energy sector, he is pragmatically willing to support state-regulated prices and cheap oil shale energy to ensure the economy's competitiveness.

The politician's social profile is dominated by a robust commitment to social justice and the fight against poverty. They demand a significant increase in social spending, the protection of vulnerable segments of the population (pensioners, low-income families), and the halting of deepening economic inequality. They consistently highlight the critical state of public health (long waiting lists for doctors, underfunding) and issues within the education sector, including teacher shortages and inadequate funding for school meals. On a values basis, they defend parental autonomy and traditional morality, opposing state intervention in family matters and criticizing the content produced by state-funded media. Simultaneously, they stand firmly for democratic principles and the rule of law, opposing collective punishment (such as the revocation of voting rights for non-citizens) and defending religious freedom and the canonical independence of the Orthodox Church from government interference.

The politician's legislative focus has consistently been directed toward sharply opposing the government's policies, primarily acting as a critical opponent of the government's tax hikes (car tax, excise duties, VAT) and cuts to social spending. His main initiative, put forth on behalf of the Centre Party faction, centers on radically changing fiscal policy, repeatedly advocating for the introduction of a windfall profits tax on banks and lowering the VAT on foodstuffs and local production to provide economic relief. Recurring priorities also include reforming election law (compensation mandates, the reliability of e-voting) and ensuring social justice by improving the sick pay system and increasing family benefits. Beyond economic matters, he actively opposes the government's green agenda commitments and demands state intervention in energy policy.