|
| A look behind the war memorial |
|
|
| Wednesday, 13 June 2007 | |
|
The furious spat between Russia and Estonia over the moving of a Soviet war memorial conceals more downto- earth motives than respect for war dead and the rights of small countries to stand up to bullies. Largely unreported, the Nord Stream gas pipeline direct from Russia to Germany under the Baltic would seem to be at the back of it all. Egged on by the United States and emboldened by membership of Nato and the European Union, Estonian Prime Minister Andrus Ansip is obstructing the progress of this energy link so vital to the Russians, as it will weaken the stranglehold by ex-Soviet states on the transport of gas to Europe. It will go through or at least affect the larger Estonian Exclusive Economic Zone in the Gulf of Finland. The joint German and Russian company has the right to build a pipeline in this zone but must satisfy Estonian environmental concerns. This involves a procedure of enquiry and consultation. The Estonians have recently rejected the dossier on the grounds that it was incorrectly filled out, causing a delay of four months. Then came the statue affair. Independent observers wonder why after 16 years of independence the Estonians suddenly decided to exercise their right to move the war memorial just a few days before the annual remembrance day in Russia on May 9… just when Russian-Western relations were at a low ebb over US plans for missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic. If it was a provocation it worked a treat. One man died and 150 were injured in the ensuing riot by ethnic Russians, who make up almost a third of the population of Estonia and half that of Tallin, the capital. Mobs demonstrated against Estonian diplomats. The Estonian Prime Minister then refused to receive ex-German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder who fronts for the Nord Stream pipeline. One in the eye for the pipeline lobby? Certainly, but in a unique new development Estonian internet links were then swamped and blocked by Russian internet users who may or may not have links with the Kremlin. Estonia is one of the most internet-orientated societies in the world. Banks and other institution have been severely damaged financially. Under the terms of the Nato treaty, this act is not a recognised military threat. In his famous wolf speech last year, when he criticised the United States for its aggressive foreign policy, Vladimir Putin promised to face up to encirclement by Nato but he also said that Russia would act asymmetrically; it would not make the mistake of the Soviet Union and be drawn into ruinously expensive countermeasures. This looks like an interesting first instalment of a cheap but effective reminder to tiny Estonia, population 1.7 million, that non-cooperation has a price whoever one’s allies are. It may also be a warning to Finland not to abandon its traditionally neutral position and join Nato, as some of its leaders currently urge. At the recent Russia-EU summit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Commission President José Manuel Barroso, after swapping insults with President Putin about human rights, solemnly warned that Estonia’s is a European Union problem. Putin then asked a very relevant question to which he got no reply: “Is there no limit to this solidarity?”, which could be translated as: “Does this mean that every time some small EU state decides to pick a quarrel with its neighbours, the whole EU has to take its side regardless of the consequences or the justice of the case?” There is no doubt that the present push for some sort of majority voting in the EU is related to it. |
| Next > |
|---|
