About trust

In Tartu with European Human Rights Court judge Julia Laffranque when she was Julia Vahing

 

Increasingly one hears that it is not possible to trust anyone in the country.  Some good friends of mine who lived here during the Soviet occupation say that back then they knew whom to trust and whom not, but now they no longer know who can be trusted.  Lack of trust has increased especially in recent years.  No doubt, part of it is due to the economic depression which has contributed to theft and deception, but a lot of the blame can be placed on the political leaders in Estonia.

Prime Minister Ansip has been a leading architect of the crisis in confidence with his statements, such as his assertion that his party’s politics will place Estonia among the five richest countries in Europe within a certain number of years, or his remark that if this is a crisis, then it is the very crisis with which he wants to live – this at a time when the numbers of unemployed and people leaving the country were increasing. 

The strategy followed by the Prime Minister’s Reform Party and its allies has been divide and conquer and for its implementation the Bolshevik principle „end justifies the means“ has been adopted.  An esteemed minister even stated in an article he wrote that human beings have not been created to serve truth, but for the purpose of staying alive.  In the political arena that can be interpreted as staying in power.  Accordingly, betrayal and mendacity are permissible in order to remain alive or in power.

The Reform Party developed an image as the political party with economic smarts after the country’s independence was restored which occurred simultaneously with the period of liberal economic policies’ popularity in the market economies. They were elected into office, but in order to remain in power - especially after the financial crash – expedient measures were needed and being astute politicians, they knew that fear is an effective tool.

Rather than agree to consensual transfer of the Bronze Soldier, which had been agreed upon by the interested parties, to the new location, the removal of the offensive Soviet era statue by the Reform Party coalition government was used to stir fear, resulting in violence. The question remains: why did the event have to be accompanied by violence and destruction when in contrast an extremely confrontational situation of considerable duration – from March to September 1991 – was handled non-violently and the aim of freedom from Moscow rule and restored independence was achieved. 

To this day arguments persist about the Bronze Soldier episode.  In my opinion, divide and conquer – that is, create hatred and fear – tactics were used in the removal.  Agreement on a peaceful removal existed, but the powers that be wanted to sow fear and have Estonians and Russians clash in hatred. 

Additionally, the role of the state Security Police remains a question mark in the above episode.  Questions have emerged since then, including the period of the political campaign preceding the parliamentary elections in March 2011 when the powers that be used the office against political opponents, thereby undermining trust in the state’s security apparatus. 

The 2011 Annual Report of the Security Police does not contain any of the charges made against the leader of the opposition during the campaign.  Instead, suspicion is cast therein on three members of the opposition party and, for an unexplained reason, the academician Ivar Raig is implicated.  Albeit in the Introduction it is stated that facts and processes are described in the yearbook, documentation which would be a professional requirement for the accusations made against the four individuals is lacking.

Opinions have been expressed that the content of the Annual Report is reminiscent of the Soviet era stigmatizing of people and the abusive practices that prevailed then.  Such practices are dangerous and should not be tolerated in a society that respects human rights and freedoms.  Silence on this matter by the head of state as well as the chairman of the political party gaining popularity in the country indicates the presence of the time-honored „silence means consent“ position.  Also, when the Director of Ethics Centre at Tartu University was asked for her opinion she replied that the Report cannot be criticized for the stated facts not being true (sic). At the same time, she does not ask why the Report does not include the residence permit sales, organized crime’s business, and money laundering – all of them threats to state security. 

The resultant situation in the country can be rightly called a crisis in confidence.  Even sports are not excluded when one considers last year’s drama surrounding the nation’s Olympic medal winner Andrus Veerpalu.  Summer Olympics will be played in London soon and Estonian athletes will be competing there.  My daughter and son-in-law have been invited to the games as VIP guests and I would be glad to ask her to wave Estonia’s flag among the guests, but I cannot do that because trust in our nation’s decision-makers is gone. 

New Year - 2012

On the way from Singapore to the US, I made a stop in Tallinn and welcomed the New Year at home.  Shortly before the end of 2011, I had been e-mailed Estonian news that involved three young Pro Patria and Res Publica Alliance (a nationalist-conservative political party) politicians - two of them members of Parliament and one a member of Tallinn City Council - who were instrumental in registering 147 Russian businessmen (some of them members of organized crime groups) in Estonia, thus granting them residence permits.  Such permits also allow the person to travel in the Schengen room (territory without inner borders). The Minister of Economic Affairs and the Interior Minister, both members of the above named Party, were accused of complicity.

To my surprise, President Ilves did not address this issue in the traditional New Year greeting to the nation, nor call for the resignation of these politicians.  He has become quite unpopular with an increasing number of Estonians, largely due to his and his wife’s apparent greed, and his aloofness.  As a consequence, he lacks moral authority which is considered a President’s major role in the republic’s parliamentary system of government. Addressing the issue of accountability by our political leaders and the President’s lack of moral authority, I wrote an article that appeared in Delfi after it had been rejected by a nation-wide weekly.  After that, articles by several noted commentators also appeared in the media, pointing out the lack of accountability and unethical behavior by the country’s leaders.

By the end of the year, one of the above parliamentarians and the City Council member had resigned (also left the Party), but the other parliamentarian is still in place.  There were calls in the Party ranks for the two ministers to resign, but when it came to a vote in the Executive Committee, the motion did not receive any Yes votes.  The two ministers remain in office.  However, quite a number of long-time members of that Party cancelled their membership over the scandal, but interestingly enough, the Party reportedly acquired a considerable number of new members.  The Party is also in the Coalition Government, and the Government has not fallen, either.

One would think that the above state of affairs would have been enough for this little country to digest, but at the beginning of April the President attended an event organized by a member of Parliament in Tallinn to criticize Russia’s authorities for arresting the punk rock ensemble “Pussy Riot” who had entered Christ the Redeemer Russian Orthodox Church in Moscow and shouted anti-Putin phrases in front of the altar. For lending his support by his presence at this event, President Ilves and the members of Parliament who had sent a protest letter to the Kremlin were criticized by the Archbishop of the Estonian Evangelical Lutheran Church, who saw these actions as condoning desecration of a house of worship and offending the faithful who do not see “Pussy Riot” performance as a political act.  

Then we celebrated Easter peacefully and the ground was covered with snow.   

Been away

                                          Sipping Singapore Sling at the Rafferty Hotel

I was away from Estonia for quite a spell which caused me to neglect the blog.  Neglect may not be the accurate word for it, because I was traveling and largely preoccupied with personal and family matters.

About a week before Halloween last year, I left for Singapore to visit my daughter’s family.  My son joined us from the US.  It happens that he and I have birthdays one day apart, and my son-in-law’s is five days after mine.  My daughter’s birthday is only some weeks later, and she had organized for us to celebrate them together at a resort in Indonesia.  

I traveled on Finnair to Singapore. A comment on Finnair’s non-stop service between Helsinki and Singapore which was launched in May.  Given that the flight is about 15 hours long, I decided to use Business Class. Leaving the cabin upon arrival, I thanked the stewardess for her service and added that I took Finnair first time 40 years ago and I have never been disappointed by the airline over the years that I have flown.   She replied that this year marks the 40^th year at Finnair for her and I said, “In that case, you probably were the stewardess on board when I took the plane from New York to Helsinki 40 years ago!”

Before my departure from Estonia, I participated in a conference on promotion of women in the business world, and decided that with some re-working the presentation makes a suitable article for a newspaper.  I submitted the article to one of the dailies and, after it was rejected, Delfi (Online news portal) posted it on November 17. 

In the article, I pointed out that in March EU’s Commissioner Vivane Reding had called on businesses listed on the stock exchanges of Europe to increase voluntarily the number of women on their boards of directors to 30 percent by 2015 and to 40 percent by 2020.   In July, the European Parliament approved the Commissioner’s recommendation. 

I suggested that in Estonia it would be sensible to start the implementation of the Commissioner’s recommendation with state owned businesses:  Eesti Energia (energy company), Eesti Raudtee (the railroad), Tallinna Sadam (the ports), and Estonian Air (the airline).  These four major businesses do not have a single woman on their boards. 

There is no doubt that qualified women exist in Estonia to serve on those boards.  More women than men are studying at the Estonian Business School and it is significant that this is true on the Masters and Doctorate degree levels.  Also, sufficient women are studying economics at other institutions of higher learning.  It is the “good ole’ boy” politics that prevents their advancement to decision making positions.   

Empirical evidence shows that businesses with women in decision making positions are more innovative and successful in the market place.  Why is that?  A major reason is the fact that women make the purchasing decisions - including the purchase of computers, automobiles, financial transactions and high-cost services. I said in the article that I am willing to be a candidate to the Board of Directors of Tallinna Sadam.

There is no question that the topic will not go away.  Commissioner Viviane Reding has said that if measures are not taken voluntarily, she will introduce legislation.  While I was away, the American Chamber of Commerce Estonia sponsored a luncheon for business women on February 14 as a ground-breaking event.  As a member of the Chamber’s Board of Directors I praised the move, but when I later saw coverage of it by a daily (including photos), placing the event in the Society rather than the Business section and had received negative feed-back from friends, I became critical.  The article referred to the women as „edukad“ (successful) and to many that term translates in the Estonian political culture into success for taking over another woman’s husband!  In addition, I learned later that men were excluded from this „business luncheon“.  Having been against segregation in the US, this revelation was quite unpalatable.

Inflammatory language and accountability

                                  With Jaak Rakfeldt and Andrus Saar in Connecticut, 1989.

On the afternoon of August 11, a naturalized Estonian citizen walked into the Estonian Defense Ministry building.  According to the authorities, the man had with him a pistol and explosives, he made no demands and took no hostages, and after more than two hours in the building, in which the employees had been evacuated, the man was fatally shot while one law enforcement officer had received a slight bruise and another had been spared by a bullet-proof vest.  In the following days, the handling of the incident was criticized considerably in the media.

August 23, a daily newspaper reported that Defense Minister Mart Laar had stated in his fraternity’s (Eesti Üliõpilaste Selts) list that assailants against the state of Estonia will be shot and he guarantees that also in the future.  To date the only reaction to that inflammatory language has been a brief statement by President Ilves in which he said that whenever an armed person assails a governmental office, takes hostages and shoots at the police, the action constitutes an attack against the state of Estonia.  Parliamentarian Mailis Reps in the weekly Kesknädal warns that inciting violence is dangerous, more so when it comes from a governmental official and especially at a time when the nation is combating violence in school. 

Minister Laar’s inflammatory language has not been followed by calls for his resignation.  Why?  This veil of silence was preceded by the one last month when journalist Priit Hõbemägi asked for full disclosure of the kidnapping of the seven bicyclists.  He expressed his astonishment over the media’s position that the public will probably never know the circumstances surrounding the kidnapping and release of the bicyclists.

A very serious international incident, the hijacking of the Arctic Sea, was associated with Eerik-Niiles Kross about a year ago, but again the public is not told what effect this has had on Estonia’s interests.  Incidentally, at the time of the events at the Ministry, Mart Laar was in the cathedral attending Eerik-Niiles Kross' wedding.

Not holding the country’s leaders accountable for their risky behavior, for stealing from the public till, for mismanaging their offices, or for threatening citizens has become common practice.  Whenever questions are raised about such behavior and demands are made for accountability, a wall of silence and secrecy descends.  The consequence is increased corruption, ineptitude, and a predictable setting in of decay in society.  Before the disclosure of Laar’s statement, we read in March the current Education (and previous Defense) Minister Jaak Aaviksoo’s article in which he justified lying in the name of national interest.  Same month it was disclosed that the International Ski Federation (FIS) suspected Estonia’s two-time Olympic gold medalist, the skier Andrus Veerpalu, of doping use.  In their quick response to the allegations, Veerpalu’s handlers resorted to the Aaviksoo doctrine, but FIS Doping Panel ruled on August 23 that Veerpalu had violated an anti-doping rule.

Eesti Üliõpilaste Selts (EÜS) has been practically from the beginning of the restored independence period a good ole’ boys club in which belong President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Mart Laar, Eerik-Niiles Kross, the brothers Kaarel and Indrek Tarand, and others, which in practice means they and their allies sit in positions of power and others are excluded. This explains to a great extent why the country has not seen the inclusion of women in the state’s decision-making offices and institutions which in essence means the arrest of democratic development. That is also why it has not been possible to work out a national developmental plan, according to the pollster and sociologist Andrus Saar, because it would interfere with the business interests of those in the power structure.  And that is also why the debates between the two presidential candidates, Toomas Hendrik Ilves and Indrek Tarand, were a disappointment to most commentators - both men are in the same fraternity and do not hold opposing views. In addition, both have wives in the same sorority, Filiae Patriae.  Although those 19^th century institutions have pretty much died out in other places, they and their outdated rules of corporate fidelity still have a hold in Estonian society. 

The Woman's Bible

                                        My granddaughters in a Christmas pageant, 2008.

An unprecedented activity for Estonia took place in the spring when the Estonian Women’s Studies and Resource Centre (ENUT) organized the seminar “Three religions from a gender perspective” at Tallinn University. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam were analyzed.

I opened the seminar with the following text:

The intention of today’s seminar is to move along with the times and to contribute to the national dialogue on religion. Starting in the fall, Estonia’s school system will introduce, in the interest of promoting ethics and tolerance, the study of religion as an elective in the curriculum.  We believe that tolerance and ethics can be taught successfully when stereotypes and myths are subjected to critical analysis.  That’s one of the aims of today’s seminar.

It is in the above spirit that I introduce „The Woman’s Bible“ which can be regarded as a book belonging among Bibles that have appeared throughout history, such as John Wycliffe’s translation into English in 1382, Martin Luther’s translation for the Germans in 1534, and the appearance of the Bible for Estonians in our native tongue in 1739.  We have reached the point in history where feminist theology embraces many religions and „The Woman’s Bible“ has played a significant role in this.

In 2010 a writer-friend in New York sent me a biography of Elizabeth Cady Stanton.  While studying history in the US, I had learned about the women’s movement, but it was not my topic of interest and, consequently, I was not very familiar with Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s story.  Reading the book, I learned that Elizabeth and other women who were called collectively „The Revising Committee“, which included  Baroness Alexandra Gripenberg in Finland, compiled „The Woman’s Bible“ at the end of the 19th century.

I bought the book and learned that it is unknown in Estonia.  We added it to ENUT’s library.  We’ve noticed at ENUT that since Estonia joined the European Union in 2004, the number of books borrowed in the religion category has increased.  Last fall I spoke with Raili Maling, a fellow member of ENUT Board and a member of Tartu University’s faculty, about The Woman’s Bible and since she was also interested in the topic of religion, we decided to organize a seminar that looks at three major religions from a gender perspective.

Who was Elizabeth Cady Stanton, what was her role in America’s history, and why did she author the book „The Woman’s Bible“?  She was born in 1815 and died in 1902.  Her father was an esteemed lawyer and judge in the State of New York.  Into the family were born five girls and six boys of whom five died in childhood.  The only surviving son came home to die in 1826 after graduating from college.  Elizabeth entered her brother’s room where her „pale and immovable“ father sat by his dying son’s bed.  She climbed into her father’s lap and at length he said, „Oh, my daughter, I wish you were a boy!“ She threw her arms around his neck and replied, „I will try to be all my brother was.“ She took her promise seriously: she studied Latin and Greek, mathematics, horseback riding and other subjects meant for boys. She was a superb student. She applied for admission to the same college her brother had attended, but was rejected because she was a female.  She went to Troy Female Seminary and obtained as great an education as was possible for a young woman at that time.

The Abolitionist Movement was strong in the northeastern part of the US and Elizabeth’s great interest in justice and legal systems (after graduating from the Seminary, she read her father’s legal literature for several years and wanted to become a lawyer, but New York statutes did not allow a woman to practice law in the State) brought her into contact with people fighting against slavery, including the young man she married.  The marriage lasted almost half century and the couple had seven children. 

Elizabeth had been raised in a Calvinist family and throughout her life she believed in God and an afterlife, but as an adult she began to look critically at the Bible.  In the Introduction to „The Woman’s Bible“ she wrote: „The canon and civil law; church and state; priests and legislators; all political parties and religious denominations have alike taught that woman was made after man, of man, and for man, an inferior being, subject to man.  Creeds, codes, Scriptures and statutes, are all based on this idea.  The fashions, forms, ceremonies and customs of society, church ordinances and discipline all grow out of this idea.“

Not agreeing with the text of the Revised Bible issued by the Anglican Church, she began to have the idea in 1886 to establish a committee for critical analysis of the Bible.  She succeeded in assembling 26 women who were not biblical scholars, but highly educated and deeply interested in the interpretation of the Bible’s texts.  The aim of the committee was to bring attention to that small section of the Bible that includes women and to correct slanted interpretation.  The work took some time, but the first part of the book appeared already in 1895. It was a „best seller“, resulting in six reprints in six months, but it was also widely criticized in editorials and pulpits.  The second part of "The Woman's Bible" was published in 1898.

The committee analyzed the Creation story. In the Book of Genesis, Chapter 1, verse 27, woman and man area created: „God created man in his own image ... male and female.“

In the Book of Genesis, Chapter 2, verses 21-23: „And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh thereof. And the rib which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.  And Adam said, This is now bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man.“

The two versions contradict each other and, therefore, both cannot be true.  How to explain the contradiction?  The compilers of „The Woman’s Bible“ assert that the first version is closer to truth than the second. They suggest that in this instance one should follow St. Paul’s opinion that it is beneficial to verify everything and to accept that which is good.

And why is the simultaneous creation of the two sexes in the image of God good?  Stanton argues that “masculine and feminine elements, exactly equal and balancing each other, are as essential to the maintenance of the equilibrium of the universe as positive and negative electricity, the centripetal and centrifugal forces, the laws of attraction which bind together all we know of this planet whereon we dwell and of the system in which we revolve.”

And to those who believe that a woman is inferior to man, because she was created after man, the book compilers say that they, therefore, must also accept that man is inferior to crawling creatures, because according to the Scriptures man was created after them. 

The third chapter contains the allegory of Adam and Eve on which is based the doctrine of original sin. According to Stanton, it describes mankind’s fall into sin and characterizes the woman as the author of all ills.  But Stanton thinks that „the unprejudiced reader must be impressed with the courage, the dignity, and the lofty ambition of the woman.  The tempter evidently had a profound knowledge of human nature, and saw at a glance the high character of the person he met by chance in his walks in the garden.  He did not try to tempt her from the path of duty by brilliant jewels, rich dresses, worldly luxuries or pleasures, but with the promise of knowledge, with the wisdom of the Gods. /.../... and he roused in the woman that intense thirst for knowledge, that the simple pleasures of picking flowers and talking with Adam did not satisfy.  Compared with Adam she appears to great advantage through the entire drama.“

Regarding the Old Testament, Stanton and her committee members found praiseworthy passages, especially concerning women. But on the whole, they concurred that Mosaic code and customs need to be censured as denigrating of women, and because they have been taught as the word of God women’s position in the society is difficult.  As mentioned above, these opinions were criticized, sometimes even severely.  Stanton replied to her critics; „To criticize the peccadilloes of Sarah, Rebekah and Rachel does not shadow the virtues of Deborah, Huldah and Vashti; when I condemn Jewish laws and customs in the first Book of Genesis, the power of the 10 commandments and the Golden Rule are not destroyed. Parts of the Bible are so true, so bright and so beautiful that it is a shame they are in the same volume with very coarse and immoral feelings and descriptions.“

Turning to the committee’s scrutiny of the New Testament, we learn that Jesus never said “that woman should be subject to man…. He spoke to the individual soul, not recognizing sex as a quality of spiritual life, or as determining the sphere of action of either man or woman.”  

There are many passages which show Jesus’ impartiality, among them, for example, Chapter 10 in the Book of Luke, verses 38-42:  “Now as they were traveling along, He entered a certain village and woman named Martha welcomed Him into her home. And she had a sister called Mary who moreover was listening to the Lord's word, seated at His feet. But Martha was distracted with all her preparations and she came up to Him and said, 'Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to do all the serving alone? Then tell her to help me.' But the Lord answered and said to her, 'Martha, Martha, you are worried and bothered about so many things. But only a few things are necessary, really only one, for Mary has chosen the good part which shall not be taken away from her.'”

That passage is, also, interpreted as Jesus’ teaching to women to seek knowledge above household tasks.  In Stanton’s book a woman’s self-development and education, seeking of truth and knowledge are an all-pervasive theme, starting with Eve in Paradise as we have seen already.

According to many theologians, Paul was the founder of Christianity; thus Paul’s references to women have great significance.  His letters to the different congregations in which he gives instructions and counsel form the basis for the Christian Church. The committee members find that there is no doubt about the prominent role women played in the early church and they cite Paul’s letters to the Romans, Chapter 16, verses 1-5: „I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea, that he receive her in the Lord as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you, for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also.  Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my helpers in Christ Jesus, who have for my life laid down their own necks, unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles.“

Stanton wrote, „Paul not only virtually pronounces Priscilla a fellow-Apostle and fellow-bishop, but specially commends Phebe, a Greek woman, as a minister (diakonos), which as we have seen, may be legitimately interpreted either presbyter, bishop, or Apostle.“

Since Paul’s teachings have been decisive in matters concerning the status of women, the committee finds it necessary to take a closer look at the sources and reasons for these teachings.  They find that many of the teachings contain old Hebrew legends, for example, the one about women having to cover their heads.

The most often cited passage pertaining to the status of women is in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, Chapter 14, verses 34-35: „Let your women keep silence in the churches for it is not permitted unto them to speak, but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.  And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home for it is a shame for woman to speak in the church.“

Why such a message to the Corinthians and not the Romans? Stanton explains: „The church at Corinth was peculiarly given to diversion and to disputation; and women were apt to join in and to ask many troublesome questions; hence they were advised to consult their husbands at home. The Apostle took it for granted that all men were wise enough to give to women the necessary information on all subjects.  Others, again, advise wives never to discuss knotty points with their husbands; for if they should chance to differ from each other, that fact might give rise to much domestic infelicity.  There is such a wide difference of opinion on this point among wise men, that perhaps it would be as safe to leave women to be guided by their own unassisted common sense.“

Indeed, also in other passages Paul has sent instructions offensive to women, but he also taught 

principles of equality.  In his letter to the Galatians, Chapter 3, verse 28 he wrote: „There is neither Jew 

nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

 

The above gives some examples from Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s book „The Woman’s Bible“.  The book could be considered as a step in the development of Christianity.  In the early years, Latin which only few knew to read was the language of the Church.  We’ve seen that in the late 14th century the Bible appeared for the first time in a language other than Latin.  After Luther’s time, the translation of the Scriptures into the vernacular spread and the Bible became accessible to many.  In the 20th century, we began to understand the Bible also in women’s language and, in conclusion, I would, therefore, submit that the Bible has had a role in the democratic development of societies. 

What became of our hopes?

                         During the freedom movement with Hando Runnel in Tartu

On May 3, 2011, the daily Päevaleht had an article about the identical features in the rhetoric of Estonian Prime Minister Ansip and his counterpart Putin in Russia.  Having read it, I remembered my reaction couple weeks ago when I happened to see on Kanal 2 a rerun of the April 2007 riots in Tallinn. I wondered why it was being served to us, because it does not fit into the anniversary mode, but then remembered that the channel is owned by Eesti Meedia, CEO’d by Reform propagandists circle member Mart Kadastik, and the company also owns Postimees.  The broadcast included snippets of an interview with Ansip and watching his face, especially his eyes, it struck me that in manner and content he resembles Putin.  Not a muscle on his face moved and his eyes pierced the air with cold indifference as he commented on the activities in town in classic Soviet terms.  Analyzing the picture objectively and considering Ansip’s background and age, I had to conclude that the two were cut from the same cloth and that the Jesuit maxim “give me a boy for the first seven years……” applies in this case also. 

Ansip’s most recent pronouncements continue in the Soviet style.  As Jaan Männik, Eesti Pank’s Chairman of the Board, tries to clean house by removing vice-presidents Ross and Minka who have occupied their posts for more than 10 years each with Reform’s blessings, Ansip did not like the decision and berated the Board „nii ei käituta“!  For a long time I’ve been of the opinion that the bank’s president, Andres Lipstok – a fellow Reform Party member – is overpaid (monthly salary of 98 000 EEK; 6263.34 EUR) and should be replaced.  Hopefully, Männik and colleagues can complete the house cleaning. 

Then, a few days ago in an interview, Ansip said in his characteristic fashion that the government need not always listen to public opinion, as if he had been anointed by the Almighty to rule over us. 

But to get back to the salaries issue, about a week ago we learned that Social Affairs Minister Pevkur, also of Reform, is going to give a bonus to the Unemployment Office director Meelis Paavel for work well done last year.  This decision challenges one’s understanding of what constitutes good work, because last year Paavel was penalized for granting a large state contract to his relative.  Paavel’s salary last year was 44 800 EEK (2863.24 EUR) per month, which is about four times the average.

Such large salaries to favorites in public office contrasts drastically with salaries paid to teachers.  Estonian teachers’ average wage is less than 1,000 EUR per month while a cleaning woman’s average wage in the European Union is about 2,000 EUR per month.  The teachers have asked for wage increase next year, but Finance Minister Ligi, again of Reform, has said „not possible“.  A closer scrutiny of salaries – and bonuses - paid to favorites in high office and a reduction to bring them in line with salaries paid out of the state budget to professionals in education and health care would do if nothing else than at least engender a sense of fairness in our society. 

And Reform’s coalition partner in government, IRL, also made news recently. The party headquarters building that was purchased when the organization was named Isamaaliit (Pro Patria) was bought by a Russian businessman.  Aside from my concern that Russian interests are buying real estate and establishing businesses in Estonia, this transaction would have no more significance.  However, Isamaaliit as a political party was synonymous with nationalism, conservatism and fierce anti-Russianism.  Hence this event is heavy with symbolism, I regret to say.  But in addition to that, it also speaks of the political party’s capacity to manage finances; the building had to be sold in order to pay debts.

Given the above mentioned attitudes and financial decisions by those in power, it is with considerable concern that I look forward to four years of this government.  The concern is even greater when it’s apparent that political opposition in the country has been decimated, that people are tired - as pollster Andrus Saar recently told me - and that general apprehension about the future and job security are palpable.

Crisis of confidence

 

 Keynote speaker Paul Goble at the 5th anniversary of the Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian Alliance of Connecticut which I chaired at that time.

Gradually it's sinking in that Estonia is becoming a country in which a freedom-loving person would find difficult to live.  Several developments lately, starting with the election campaign last December, have made me think about the breakfast I had with Paul Goble in January 2009 when I was in Washington DC.  Referring to Estonia, he thought that freedom was slipping away.  In the interim, I've mentioned Paul Goble’s concern to some people in Estonia, but to no avail.  Paul Goble is a political analyst who formerly served as Special Advisor on Soviet Nationality Problems and Baltic Affairs at the State Department during the tense days when the Soviet Union was collapsing.  Condoleezza Rice, a member of President H.W. Bush’s National Security Council at the time, said to Paul Goble, a strong supporter of the Baltic freedom movement, “You control your Balts”.  Paul Goble said to her, “You have to understand that these people are willing to die for their freedom.  Do you want their blood on your hands?”

In addition to political opposition parties in Estonia being destroyed (a development that reminds me of Martin Niemöller's "First they came for the....), state agencies being used by the powers that be for their political ends, and last month - the month of March – three significant events took place.  We had elections whose results are suspected of having been stolen thanks to electronic voting pushed by the powers that be, the president signed into law a bill liberalizing the use of surveillance over citizens, and in a governmental monthly, Diplomaatia, appeared an article by Defense Minister Jaak Aaviksoo in which he justifies the use of deceit and lies in the name of self-defense and survival: "Likewise we have to accept the understanding that God or Darwin (interesting is that he capitalizes Darwin, but not God which is the standard - my comment) - depending on your worldview - did not give us consciousness and erudition in order to serve truth, which is what some people fooled by the Reformation and Enlightenment think to this day, but for the purpose of staying alive." (my translation) 

Aaviksoo does introduce his thesis with reference to cyber wars, but it is reasonable to assert that his deeply held worldview becomes applicable in his decision-making on national issues.

The problems surrounding e-voting are considerable.  As a former Registrar of Voters in my Connecticut town for over 15 years, I'm sensitive to the electoral procedures that protect the citizen's right to a secret ballot, a fundamental requirement in a democracy, and I see many violations.  Several years ago I familiarized myself with Estonia's election law and volunteered to observe at the town-center polling places.  I submitted to the political party of which I was a member a report on the violations I observed and hoped for a follow-up which never came. 

Regarding Jaak Aaviksoo’s manifesto in Diplomaatia, Tallinn University Rector Rein Raud (however, he identified himself as a citizen-author of the article), rang an alarm bell in the daily Eesti Päevaleht (24.03.11), saying that in western countries such ideology would be understood only among holocaust-deniers, a viewpoint criminalized in democratic countries.  That such a position is embraced by a minister serving in the government is cause for him to ask the coalition partners, Reform Party and IRL, whether such understanding of history, truth and identity is going to be incorporated in the future government. 

In his view, Aaviksoo has to resign. But what decision did Aaviksoo’s party, IRL, make?  Aaviksoo was appointed the Education Minister, thus saying to the citizens fy! 

Thirdly, Justice Ministry had submitted a bill to the parliament which would give prosecutors expanded rights to spy on people.  According to the Constitution, court’s permission is required for snooping on a citizen, but the legislation allows the prosecutor to do that for 24 hours and then turn to the court.  The bill went to President Ilves for his signature and although it is in conflict with the Constitution, he signed it into law. According to the newspaper (Eesti Ekspress, 24.03.11), he sent the law to the Justice Ministry for revision. What kind of revision, the newspaper does not say.  It appears Ilves does not want to be in conflict with the powers that be, because he wants to be re-elected this summer by the parliament.

 

Additional disturbing information about surveillance of citizens was given by the former head of Central Criminal Police, Andres Anvelt, who said that 888 requests were made last year to listen in on telephone conversations of which 98% were granted, but he thinks actually 30,000 to 40,000 was the total number of people whose telephone conversations were tapped.

And this month the nation was shaken by news that Olümpic gold medalist Andrus Veerpalu is suspected of having used performance-enhancing drugs and that the nation’s ski association has been applying the Aaviksoo doctrine – lying, covering up, and possibly also causing the athlete to dissemble – with regard to this situation.   What would be the consequences when such practices are used on the government’s level? Can we be sure that they are not being used?

Contrary to the argument advanced by Aaviksoo and the practices pursued by decision-makers in high places, it is my belief that the chances for survival of a small country like Estonia are greater if she has the respect and support of the international community.  Lies and unethical activities do not translate into such support.  Being a country where democratic institutions are still in adolescence and citizens unaccustomed to democratic practices, it would behoove the nation to learn what others have learned in history: eternal vigilance is the price of liberty and that freedom is still a worthy goal.  It is not enough to just vote when the date appears on the calendar.