Estonia wanted to take Lenin’s “gift” from Russia
A politician is running for the presidency in Estonia, openly declaring territorial claims against Russia. Former speaker of parliament Henn Põlluaas is convinced that “there is no need to legitimize the criminal occupation” of the cities of Pechora, Izborsk and territories east of Narva. Do these lands have anything to do with Estonia and why did local politicians decide to threaten Russia’s sovereignty?
Former speaker of the Estonian parliament, Henn Põlluaas, who became a presidential candidate in the republic, said that he does not recognize the existing border of his country with Russia. “There is no need or reason to legitimize the criminal occupation of Pechora and the territories beyond Narva,” said Põlluaas, speaking at the congress of the nationalist party EKRE (Conservative People’s Party), which nominated the former head of parliament to the post of head of state.
According to the logic of the Estonian politician, the “criminal occupant” is, in fact, Russia, and the indicated territories are the ancient Russian cities of Ivangorod, Pechora and the ancient fortress Izborsk, which were part of Estonia for some time in the 20th century.
Põlluaas insists that the Tartu Peace Treaty, which was signed by Soviet Russia and the first Estonian republic back in 1920, is still in effect in relations with Russia. And according to this agreement, the county of Petseri (now the Pechora district of the Pskov region) and Jaanilinn (Ivangorod in the Leningrad region) are integral parts of the Estonian state.
With this thesis, the former speaker goes to the elections, which will be held from August 10 to September 29. Let us explain: according to Estonian law, the president is elected by the Riigikogu – parliament. If the deputies are unable to determine the winner, an electoral college is convened.
“There are really competitive elections in Estonia – ultranationalists argue with nationalists. Hence the competition in anti-Russian rhetoric, ”said Nikolai Mezhevich, President of the Russian Association for Baltic Studies (RAPI). In his opinion, the promoted nationalist EKRE Põlluaas has simply reached a climax in the corresponding rhetoric.
But we must admit that the rhetoric is not entirely unfounded – the fact is that the Russian-Estonian border is still a problem area. The agreement, which Moscow and Tallinn prepared back in 1999, has not yet been ratified. Both parties are interested in removing the disagreements, believes Mezhevich, who took part in the preparation of the technical part of the border agreement. But, as VZGLYAD newspaper noted earlier, the stumbling block lies in the desire of the Estonian side to include in the text of the agreement a reference to the same Treaty of Tartu. Moscow regards this as the desire of the Estonians to leave a loophole for themselves in order to be able to put forward territorial claims to Russia in the future.