Estonia does not need a president who can be everything at once, but an institution that helps keep our constitutional order in balance when the world around us is not, Mari-Liis Jakobson writes.
Midsummer is over. News reports suggest alcohol consumption was lower, and the resulting quiet was filled instead with debate over who might become Estonia’s next president. The hottest political news of the holidays was Alar Karis announcing he will not run for a second term. Now the search for Estonia’s next president has truly begun.
Compared with other elections, choosing Estonia’s president is a paradoxical process. First, the number of electors is small — far fewer than in Riigikogu or local council elections — yet the choice of person interests almost everyone. Second, the president’s formal powers are limited and the role is largely symbolic, but expectations remain sky‑high.
The president should be capable in foreign policy but pay equal attention to domestic cohesion. The president should be a moral compass but not turn into an endless moral lecturer. The president should seek compromise but also be forceful and principled. The president should stand above day‑to‑day politics but intervene when the situation demands it.
The thought experiment known as Schrödinger’s cat comes to mind. A cat sealed in a box is subject to quantum processes and, until the box is opened to check whether it is alive or dead, it is considered both alive and dead at the same time.
Estonia’s future president is similar: until a specific candidate is elected, the person is imagined as fulfilling all contradictory roles at once.
But choosing a president should not be a contest to see who can embody the most opposing expectations. A better question is where the president’s role will actually matter most in the coming years.
The answer lies less in candidates’ personal qualities and more in the sensitive points of Estonia’s political environment. Three stand out.
We are a small state
First, Estonia is a small state. I agree with those who say the president’s foreign policy capability is important. At the same time, our constitutional logic says that unlike in Finland, Estonia’s president does not lead foreign policy. Shaping and implementing it is the government’s job.
The president must therefore add value in foreign relations, not compete with the prime minister or foreign minister. The president can maintain relationships with countries and individuals who may not receive the government’s daily attention. The president can explain Estonia’s security interests outside traditional diplomatic formats. The president can keep attention on Ukraine, NATO unity and the defense of a rules‑based international order. A good president does not speak over the government but amplifies Estonia’s message where the office, personal authority and contacts make it possible.
High constitutional ideals
Second, Estonia is a small state that has set itself high constitutional ideals, and its credibility depends on how well we uphold them. The president is one of the guarantors of this constitutional order. The president and legal advisers must ensure that laws passed by Riigikogu are constitutional and sufficiently clear. They must ensure that our fundamental rights, democratic values, principles of equal treatment, freedom of enterprise and much more written into the Constitution are not harmed.
This is especially important when security becomes the justification for more and more decisions. Security is not protected only with weapons and borders, but also by ensuring that all people in Estonia feel the state belongs to them.
President Alar Karis declined to promulgate more laws during his five‑year term than Kersti Kaljulaid and Toomas Hendrik Ilves did in the same time span. This suggests that as parliamentary politics and legislative practices evolve, and as the external environment becomes more tense, the president’s role in safeguarding constitutional ideals has grown. It is still not comparable to the early years of restored independence and the roles of Lennart Meri and Arnold Rüütel.
A turbulent external environment
Third, Estonia is a small state with high constitutional ideals operating in a highly turbulent external environment. Ideally, the president can encourage parliamentary politics to look beyond the election cycle. In practice, the president is crucial as a cross‑party anchor of continuity and stability during changes of government.
Estonia may not be as polarized as many other countries, but trust in the government and Riigikogu has declined noticeably in recent years. Trust in the presidency should not feed on the weakness of parliament. The president should use the office’s authority to support the credibility of the entire constitutional system.
This becomes even more important in an era of information manipulation. We have seen how information attacks are used to destabilize domestic politics in other countries, cast doubt on election results and fuel general distrust.
If such attacks reach Estonia, the president may become a target. But the president may also be the guardian of trust when the government, parliament, election organizers or other institutions come under attack.
In the end, Estonia does not need a Schrödinger’s president who can be everything at once. We also do not need an all‑powerful president. We need a complement and a counterbalance — someone who helps keep our constitutional order steady precisely when the world around us is no longer steady.
—
