ICUV co-founder Olena Halushka and Programme Director Iryna Krasnoshtan attended the 17th Lennart Meri Conference 2024, which took place in Tallinn from 16 to 18 May.

ICUV team advocated for the confiscation of the Russian frozen assets, in particular at the closed-door discussion “Holding Russia Accountable — From Freezing to Seizing Russian Assets” (more details here), as well as for the urgent defence assistance for Ukraine.

The three days were packed with insights from distinguished policymakers, analysts, politicians, military officials and academics worldwide. Discussions focused on foreign and security policy issues, mainly from the perspective of Northern and Eastern Europe.

“Fear keeps us from supporting Ukraine. Countries have different fears, be it nuclear fear, fear of escalation, or fear of migration. We must not fall into the trap of fear because that is what Putin wants. He wants us to be afraid and not support Ukraine out of fear. That means helping Ukraine push Russia back to its borders. We must maintain sanctions until Ukraine’s territorial integrity is restored. The aggressor must pay for the damage caused and the perpetrators, including the Russian leadership, must be held accountable. The end of grey zones is the peace that Europe needs – that means Ukraine must become a member of both the EU and NATO”

 stated Prime Minister of Estonia Kaja Kalllas

We have summarized some key ideas heard at the Conference:

Support to Ukraine

• Western society does not fully grasp the complexity of the current situation in Ukraine. They underestimate the cost of inaction.
• US strategy in Ukraine is guided by fear rather than by purpose. The US should respond to a fundamental question — what is the US strategy in Ukraine?
• The centre of gravity in Europe remains in France and Germany — this is where key decisions are made.
• Europe has not been exposed to such a large-scale war since World War II, it needs time for its defence industries to pick up the pace.
• Nuclear proliferation is an important topic today: If Russia wins against the country that publicly and ceremonially gave up its nukes, and Russia publicly makes nuclear threats, – it is grounds for the nuclearisation of other states.
• Russia knows that migration is a vulnerability for Europe (Europe is afraid of new waves of emigration) and is exploiting this. Ukraine and its partners need to enlist the support of countries that may not fully believe that Russia is a threat, but are very concerned about migration, given the prospect of another migration crisis this winter, which is expected to be triggered by the shelling of energy infrastructure in Ukraine. Read more here.
• Estonia’s support of Ukraine- an example for other countries to follow: Estonia increased its defence spending 10 times more than an average NATO Ally. Only 19 NATO Allies (out of 32) will reach 2% GDP on defence this year. However, 2% should be the floor and not the ceiling. Currently, only 4 countries spend more than 3% of GDP on defence, including Estonia. Estonia now spends 3.2% of GDP on defence, which requires raising taxes, which is not a popular decision for taxpayers. Estonia also committed to spending 0.25% of its GDP on support for Ukraine and adopted its strategy to support Ukrainian victory and called for other allies to do that

“Russia is strong, we are suffering from… insufficient supplies of military assistance, which we are forced to compensate with heroism and sacrifice of our soldiers. So the main message remains the same: send us everything. Because we have proven over these two years that when our soldiers have everything they need, we succeed, and when we don’t have everything that we need, we don’t”

pointed Ukraine’s foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba.

NATO enlargement and the upcoming Washington, DC Summit

• NATO enlargement has not changed the Alliance’s behaviour, particularly towards Russia, but it has changed Russia’s behaviour towards NATO. Russia’s current aggressive behaviour in Europe — GPS jamming, cyber, hybrid attacks — confirms this.
• In 1999 –25 years ago — Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary joined NATO at the Washington Summit. However, the Baltic States’ persistent bid for membership was not supported at the time. Germany, France, Spain, the United Kingdom and Italy were opposed, mainly because of their Russification. It was only in 2002, when the ‘big bang’ of enlargement took place, that these countries were accepted.
• The NATO Summit in Washington, D.C. should send a message of unity and action from all NATO Allies. 
• Ukraine should not expect an invitation with a clear timetable for NATO membership at the Washington, D.C. Summit.

“For my part, in addition to the traditional arguments, I call for the confiscation debate to be moved from Berlin and Brussels to Kharkiv, where the optics of what needs to be done to truly preserve the world order, as well as the sense of urgency, will be very different. We will be able to find a safe place for high-ranking guests somewhere in an underground school (the 21st century is here!). I also remind of the urgency of the situation regarding the supply of weapons, air defence systems, and long-range missiles, as even our close friends do not fully understand the scale of the energy problems, for example”

said ICUV co-founder Olena Halushka.

Why trying to negotiate is not an option

• The statement that all wars end up in negotiations is false. According to the Hague Center for Strategic Studies, only 46% of wars end in negotiations In particular, only about one-fifth (21%) of them had a decisive outcome in which one party ended up as the victor and the other as the loser (i.e., total victory/defeat). Almost one-third (30%) of these wars ended in a ceasefire, while only one-sixth (16%) were concluded with a peace agreement. The remaining cases had an outcome without clear victory/defeat nor any type of peace settlement. Worryingly, of the negotiated peace agreements between 1975 and 2018 almost four out of ten (37%) broke down following a reignition of the war between the same parties. Moreover, more than three-quarters (76%) of the peace agreements that broke down did so within two years, 12% lasted for two to five years, and another 12% lasted for more than five years but eventually broke down. Wars that end in a tie as opposed to a decisive victory, where both sides share an acrimonious history, and where one side’s existence is threatened, are significantly more likely to be repeated.
• According to the game theory, the sooner you run to the negotiation table, the less likely the peace is.
• Ending the fighting in Ukraine will not necessarily mean the end of the war.
• While European security means that its neighbours should be secure, Russian security requires its neighbours to be insecure.
• Ukraine is buying time for the West and has been doing so since 2014.
• The only sustainable security guarantee for Ukraine is NATO.

“Let us not despair, but act — was the conference’s main theme. Ukrainians are acting every single day, risking their lives. Our Western partners should act as soon as possible, as bravely as possible and with everything needed for Ukraine to win. Ukraine needs more air defence, including Patriots, more ammunition, armoured vehicles, help to #closethesky and lifting the ban on using Western weapons to hit russian territory”.

noticed ICUV Programme Director Iryna Krasnoshtan

Publications and media appearances:

The special edition of ICDS Diplomaatia featured Olena Halushka’s article on Make Russia Pay, available in English and Estonian.

Olena Halushka also recorded a podcast with the Ukrainian Center of the University of Tartu, where she discussed priorities, challenges, and prospects of advocacy for Ukraine, as well as discussed the fight against corruption in wartime Ukraine at the Latvian Radio’s podcast “Drošinātājs. 

Iryna Krasnoshtan participated in the live recording of the Brussels Sprouts podcast where she was able to voice questions to the guests, Ministers of Defence of Estonia and Sweden.