Andres Kasekamp

Reviewed by Ain Söödor

One of the ironies that emerges from Kasekamp's description about the struggle between the Veterans and the government of President Päts in his book, THE RADICAL RIGHT IN INTERWAR ESTONIA, is the fact that not only were both groups constantly adopting, co-opting and appropriating each others' policies - until the distinctions between both groups tend to blur and disappear - what the Veterans and President Päts both advocated were things that most Estonians valued - solidarity, self-sacrifice, (Page 12), social justice and liberalism (Page 18), Vabadussõja vaim - the spirit of unity and friendship, duty and national consciousness of the days of the War of Independence - (Page 24), patriotism, idealism, (Page 25), the elimination of Marxist influences on the education of Estonian youth (Page 30), honesty, (Page 78) fairness (Page 88), morality, a sense of honor (Page 121), harmony, solidarity, co-operation among all classes, singleness of purpose (Page 122) a new constitution and a strong executive (Page 28) with sufficient powers to put an end to the wastefulness and corruption of unprincipled politicians and parties (Pages 28 and 65), profiteering (Page 88) and unemployment (Page 94).

'Individual rights alone are not decisive, rather - who does the most good for the state,' said President Päts, (Page 8). 'This emphasis on public responsibilities and national duties rather than individual rights,' explains Kasekamp, 'was a prevalent theme for the Päts regime and was quite consistent with the ideas esposed by the Veterans,' (Page 122).

Kasekamp may be right. It is possible that Päts wanted Estonians to give up their individual rights for the good of the state. But it is also possible that he was asking Estonians to do what Estonian Boy Scouts and Girl Guides are still asked to do - to place the interests of the community ahead of their own individual interests. 'Interests', not 'rights'. And when President Päts expressed what Kasekamp refers to as 'patriotic platitudes' (Page 157) - by advocating 'moral' and 'honorable' conduct, the need for Estonians to unite for the sake of the common good, to do what does '... the most good for the state' (121), and when President Kennedy said to Americans, 'Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country', were people really being asked to give up their individual rights or were they being asked to re-order their priorities?

There was an economic depression not just in Estonia but in the entire Western World and Estonia's constitution, adopted by the Constituent Assembly in 1920 - the constitution that, among other things, '... guaranteed equal rights for all ethnic minorities... '(Page 19) and is '... often referred to as 'ultra democratic,' (Page 13) - made it difficult for the government to deal with the mounting problems of poverty and unemployment.

Many agreed with General Johan Laidoner when he said that 'As a result of our revolutionary spirit and lack of practical experience, we created a poor constitution ... A hundred-headed council with unlimited authority cannot govern any state well, the government ... has no chance to realize any long-term program before it is brought down.' (Page 33)

The Veterans agreed with Laidoner, Päts agreed with the Veterans and the constitutional amendment bill submitted by the Veterans to the Riigikogu was '... almost identical to the bill submitted by the Farmers' Party, headed by Päts,' (Page 34) - the bill that had originally failed to obtain majority approval. A referendum was held on the constitutional bill proposed by the Veterans in October 1933 and the League, having transformed itself into a political party by then, campaigned vigorously in support of the bill. The government of Jaan Tõnisson opposed the bill but the Farmers' Party and their leader, Konstantin Päts, as well as General Laidoner, supported it and the bill was overwhelmingly approved - 416,879 in favor, 156,891 against.

The central principle of what became known as 'The Veterans' constitution', was '... the creation of a strong presidency', writes Kasekamp, (Page 40).

The new constitution gave the President (Riigivanem) the use of a suspensive veto, the right to issue laws by decree in case of 'immediate state necessity', the right to dissolve the Riigikogu before the end of its four-year term and the right to declare '... a state of emergency in response to a threat of war...' (Page 45).

(To be continued)

Märkmed: