EXPERT INTERVIEW — When it comes to Europe's "frontline states" that worry about aggression from Russia, the Baltic nations stand apart. They were under the control of the Soviet Union from 1940 until the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet state, and long before that their populations were subjects of the Russian empire. Today, anxiety in the three Baltic states – Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia - has multiple sources: Russian President Vladimir Putin's often-expressed ambitions for a "greater Russian world"; his nostalgia for the Soviet Union (he called its demise the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century"), and his complaints about NATO's eastward expansion – given that the three Baltic states are all NATO members that border Russia.
Perhaps not surprisingly, then, as the Trump administration has moved more closely to Moscow, the Baltic nations are also overindexed when it comes to defense spending and advocating for a stronger European stand against Russia. After a pledge last week by Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal, all three Baltic states will spend at least 5% of GDP on defense this year — a figure far higher than the NATO average — and all have cited the Russian threat as the reason for the shift.
“Russia has not changed its goals and imperialistic ambitions. This is a real threat to both Europe and NATO,” Michal said on X. “Our aim is clear — to make any aggression against us unfeasible.”
Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia have also been particularly concerned by the Trump Administration's turn towards Moscow - a policy shift that has left grave questions about geopolitical norms that have been in place in Europe since the second World War.
“We're in a different world in which aggression is legitimized,” former Estonian President Toomas Ilves said in an interview with The Cipher Brief.
“You have an 80-year tradition, since 1945, saying that this is the world that we live in – and to pull the rug out from under it, I think we should all be disoriented at this point. Where are we going?”
Ilves, who is a member of The Cipher Brief expert network, spoke with Cipher Brief Managing Editor Tom Nagorski. Their conversation has been edited for length and clarity. You can also watch it, in full, at our YouTube channel.
The Cipher Brief: What was your reaction to the recent agreement by Presidents Putin and Zelensky to stop attacks on energy infrastructure?
President Ilves: Any step forward towards reduction in destruction of a country is positive. On the other hand, the killing continues; you're avoiding infrastructure, whereas people keep being killed. So it's not a great step. The other night there was a massive [Russian] attack on the suburbs of Kyiv. That's directed toward the civilian population. It's not even about belligerence on the front lines. It is just an attack on civilians.
The Cipher Brief: And what hope do you have, if any, that the current process with the White House, Kyiv and Moscow can lead to a broadening of the ceasefire, at least, or a long-term agreement?
President Ilves: I think the ceasefire can be expanded. But on a broader agreement, if there is anything that rewards aggression and the violation of the 1945 UN Charter, and if the U.S. agrees to say that it's OK to launch a war of aggression and occupy territories and keep them — remember there's a prohibition against the use of force to change borders or even the threat of use of force — basically, that means that the post-World War II settlement is over.
You could argue it was kind of wobbly already, after Russia’s 2008 invasion of Georgia, and then after the 2014 invasion of Ukraine. But if this stands, then the post-World War II settlement, or Pax Americana, if you will, is over. We're in a different world in which aggression is legitimized. Might makes right, ultimately, and you really go back to Thucydides: “The strong do what they will, and the weak do what they must.” That is a different world than any of us who are under 85 understand. That's where we are, if that aggression stands.
Experts are gathering at The Cipher Brief’s NatSecEDGE conference June 5-6 in Austin, TX to talk about the future of war. Be a part of the conversation.
The Cipher Brief: You said it was wobbly for a while. Did you have any inkling, even after Mr. Trump's reelection, that this unraveling of the Pax Americana, as you put it, would be this quick?
President Ilves: I was publicly discounting those who were so worried. I said, No, it's not going to be that bad. But basically you have an 80-year tradition since 1945 saying that this is the world that we live in – and to pull the rug out from under it, I think we should all be disoriented at this point. Where are we going? That's certainly what has led to this dramatic acceleration of European defense spending, by Germany and at the level of the EU. It's more than a sea change. We're living in a different world today, when it comes to security, at least.
The Cipher Brief: How heartened have you been by the speed of that response? Three years ago, there was some surprise that NATO was coming together as quickly as it was, in the aftermath of the initial Russian invasion. Have you been surprised by the pledges, the ramp-up of defense spending and so forth from across Europe?
President Ilves: Personally, I have always been a transatlanticist. That's the label that has been put on me for the past 35 years – that he's one of those pro-Americans. I've had a Damascene conversion given the events here, and there is no solution to our security in Europe without a complete change in our approach to it.
You can see this in the decisions by countries like Portugal and Denmark to reevaluate purchasing U.S. weapons. In other words, what we're seeing is more than just the anti-European rhetoric that we were so shocked by at the Munich Security Conference by Vice President [JD] Vance. That had more than simply polemical value, but in fact became policy with direct consequences, probably people being killed. We see a complete reevaluation. People like myself, who were saying, Well, it’s rhetoric, are now saying, Well, it's real. And so that is changing at a really fast clip.
The real problem is how fast can we in Europe get ourselves back up to speed. I think the damage done even to the U.S. defense industry is enormous, because the amount of distrust now is huge.
The Cipher Brief: What about in the Baltic States in particular? How have these last tumultuous couple of months been received there?
President Ilves: I can speak for Estonia. Our government decided this week to boost our defense expenditure for next year up to 5% of GDP. Right now we're at 3.6%, which is way above the EU average. We were actually one of the very few countries that had already hit 2%, 13 years ago. So, we've been quite conscious. And Latvia and Lithuania have also been spending a lot of money. And you have to put Poland in there as well, which is probably the biggest spender right now. Poland has bought or will acquire some 800 main battle tanks, which is a larger number than all of the rest of Europe. That shows how serious people are. So we're all here.
The public is willing to put up with the spending. So far, we haven't had any great rumbles based on decreasing social expenditure, which is a necessary thing to do. And Latvia, Lithuania as well. Lithuania I know is quite gung-ho. Latvia is getting there as well, and they're actually spending 3.6 % as well this year. So that's a big change.
And of course in our neighborhood, we also have Finland and Sweden and Denmark, which are all increasing their defense expenditure as well as attention to all kinds of issues such as the hybrid or so-called gray-zone warfare attacks that we've seen in the Baltic Sea — cutting undersea cables, and we've had arson that has been directly tied to the Russians.
I'd say that there is a high awareness, some anxiety, but also a willingness and a rational response – well, we just have to do more.
Everyone needs a good nightcap. Ours happens to come in the form of a M-F newsletter that provides the best way to unwind while staying up to speed on national security. Sign up today.
The Cipher Brief: What should Americans understand about Estonia's position in all of this?
President Ilves: Like the other Baltic countries, we all share a border with Russia, so that already makes us quite “front-line.” Any kind of physical incursion would be rather simple if they were to follow that.
Why should we care about Estonia? Proportionally, we had casualties up there with the U.S. and the UK in Afghanistan. We're a small country, so there are fewer numbers, of course, but in terms of the proportionality, we were up there as one of the highest casualty rates. As far as funerals went, I went to every single one. It had the same kind of effect in this country as it did in the UK, Canada and the United States. The argument, of course, was that we were doing our duty in NATO. So now, there is some disappointment is having done all that and then hearing the rhetoric that, Oh, those Europeans, they're not doing anything. Why should we go defend them? That's disconcerting – if not really depressing.
The Cipher Brief: And back to your broader points about how Europe writ large has responded, from a military and defense standpoint, where are the big gaps, as the continent prepares to go it alone if need be, without the U.S.?
President Ilves: The problem is gearing up. As a result of the so-called peace dividend of 1989-91, and a lack of defense spending since the end of the Cold War, the defense industry has languished. When any of these countries bought anything, the go-to country was the United States. So to get the defense industry here up to speed, to be able to produce munitions or other material and kit, is going to take time. It's not something that you just do overnight. I guess it's something equivalent to what the United States did in 1941 to 1945, which was just a complete change.
The money is there now. The Chancellor-elect of Germany has basically changed the constitution in order to bypass the restrictions on spending, to go over their limit. The EU is passing a law that would commit €150 billion for EU defense spending, with the assumption that the rest of the countries would kick in their part, which would amount to €800 billion. And then of course, back to the Germans, they're putting in up to almost a trillion Euros for infrastructure and armament. So this is such a big change for Europe. We'll see what it all means. But that's only in the past week and a half.
The Cipher Brief: I know you have your educational background in psychology, and I wonder if you would share any analysis on that front of the three leaders who are engaged in this from Russia, Ukraine, and the U.S.
President Ilves: My background in psychology is in experimental psychology, which is more with vision and perception and cognition than personality. But in addition to that, I would caution against ascribing any kind of psychological defects or anything else to leaders or people who run countries, whether they're democratically elected or not. I try to focus on what they do. And what they do is more of a violation of the rules of the game that we've had since the end of World War II. And if the rules don't apply anymore, we're going to have to come up with new rules. And at this point, I don't think anyone anywhere knows where all of this is going.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
