Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Prime Minister, thank you so much for taking the time and speaking to Bloomberg here the sidelines at the informal European Council meeting here in Cyprus. I'd like to get first an overview from you of kind of what the priorities are going into this meeting, What are the main points of discussions, What would you like to leave Cypress with.
It's unofficial meeting, and that will mean that we'll be talking quite freely about Ukraine, and that is probably the most important topic what will be going on because today we had this monumental decision which was long awaited. Ninety billion package is decided and also twenty sanction package is decided, so that will mean that Ukraine will have its backing
for a longer time. Also about security security of European Union, what are the plans I know that some of the member states are asking about the Article forty two went seven. What will be the practical sites according to this? And also probably energy is the topic because as everybody can see that this kind of instability in Hormus, europass about the gobble, less than five percent of itsclude oil coming
from there. But for a longer period of time it will have impact on oil, gasoline, on gas and so on.
And on Ukraine.
You know, we had very sort of pessimistic period of time after December, after the sort of ninety billion was blocked. Now we've had suddenly the ninety billion before the twenty sanction PACs. Now sort of building on that momentum. What do you think is next year? I think that one of the big debates is about EU accession for Ukraine. They'd like to join by next year. Do you think that that's a real possibility.
I would say that the start of the accession process probably would be the most important, and the end goal should be full membership that is quick clear for Ukraine from Alder and so on, Yes, we probably will be talking about this today and next meeting and so on. Our position is that we support Ukraine in European Union because, to be honests no other way, Ukraine belongs to Europe and Europe is stronger with Ukraine.
And thinking about the twenty first sanction package, what should that contain.
Our message is that this kind of full maritime services banned because to be honest, Estonia has been leading or being with other countries with fight against Russian set afleet. This is delivering a little bit less than half of Putins war chest money and also with Russian assets, so probably getting them off track with getting new money, fresh cash for waging the war, that probably would be the
first thing and second thing goal. So added to that also the Russian X fighters banned from single area and.
European air and thinking also about the energy crisis is obviously is in front of mind for a number of people. How severe do you judge this crisis to be? Because it seems that my impression is that there's a lot of wishful thinking in Europe, that there's a lot of hope that this is just going to not be a problem a few months from now. However, if it is we go into the winter and we have gas shortages, we have all kinds of shortages, it becomes very severe. How seriously do you judge this issue?
To be honest, The longer the conflict lasts, the longer the influence will be. The influence will be on many tracks. The first one is probably immediate gas prices in the gas stations that will be felt. Everybody will be questioning about accises, taxes, and so on inside the contest because it's on the supply side. Second one is which will be impacting Central Europe and Eastern Europe, but the middle of the year and at the end of the is the cash prices because we need it for heating and
energy production, and the prices up and so on. And the second track, which probably will be affected a good way. In every bad thing, there's also good side that renewables and the production of renewables will be going up. So things happening in Hormos probably right now the booster for renewables, but.
That's a much sort of longer term vision. For example, in Estonia the last quarter there was a slight contraction. Do you think that it could cause, for example, a recession within Estonia.
Depends pretty much so on Europe as a whole, because we are quite exporting nation and we are depending mainly on our markets, for example in Scandinavia, Finland, speeding and so on. Second thing is about the every war, which will be decided by central banks, because if the information will be going up, I would predict that central banks would not be in that kind of party that they were last time, but they will have to step up let's say at the autumn and so on.
To make all so certain, as you get concerned about a smaller nation, for example, competing for supplies of fuel for against say you know, Germany or something like that, jet fuel has obviously been sort of front and center.
How concerned you about supplies there?
I would say that we have our system of this kind of reserves. Everybody probably has their own system with reserves. So right now it's not yet a question about reserves and supply, but it could be if the conflict is prolonged, for example, Ye two, something that will have an impact. But in this kind of economy, you always know that the price which is coming from supply and demand will
also have its impact. So you will see certain flights canceled, you will see people buying less catoline, canceling different trips. So this will also have this kind of elasticity in economy.
And thinking about the source of this crisis, the war in Iran, there's been a lot of debate. Sometimes we hear from the President of the United States is sometimes very upset that Europe and NATA are not involved in the straight upform mood.
Sometimes he's indifferent about it.
What do you think Europe's role should be in the straight UPFORMOD should they answer the President of the United States's call.
I would say that Europe has already talked that. Last week we were in a meeting by Emanuel mccron gives Starman, another's with if Metz chose Malone and so on, and the message was that Europe is able and willing to participate. And we have also been saying to the States that if all participation is needed, for example in the mining and so on, that's also possibility. But the States has
not been asking us. So I would say that Europe is willing probably to step up in certain questions, but the question is about the capabilities, for example, once again the mining or something like that.
And your Defense Minister spoke recently with the Secretary of Defender, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth in the United States and they told you that be delayed some of the delivery of ammunition and other hardware. At what point does that delay? Well, first of all, what kind of problem does that pose for Estonia? And at one point for how much time then do you have to start thinking about getting that supply from somewhere else.
We have quite this kind of diffused buying of AMMO and weaponry, but certain weaponry is coming and hopefully coming soon from the States. But we also understand the position and needs because if they are in conflict and they are running out of AMMO capabilities there so everybody probably can understand their own motivation to say, even due to the best allies, that we are still waiting because as you can remember, President Somemp has this message that the
country is contributing more to their own defense. Are up to this line or at the front of the line, and estone is there. But we also can understand and so that probably will mean that our blandness will have to decide that can be substitute this Will we wait for something so that.
You have a time frame in mind at which one it becomes critical.
Probably it's more technical question, not still critical question.
And just the final question about NATO.
You know, President Trump has repeatedly recently been calling NATO a paper tiger. That has prompted a lot of discussions within European allies and that article forty two seven, how do you view that within the European treaty, does there need to be not an alternative to NATO? But another sort of pillar of defense within Europe that needs to be operationalized and be taken more seriously.
I would say that Europe is mainly based on NATO's defense plans and it's working well, to be honest, because we have practical experience. We had Russian meeks in our airspace, we had NATO's air policing, you know, our area, and the Italian F thirty five is the most modern they are and up and diverted Russian planes. And at the same time we have NATO ships on the sea which are protecting different kind of critical infrastructure. So on the
practical and military level, NATO's working absolutely well. But at the same time, this kind of Article forty two seven has been invoke prob only once when France did that. And also that means the same thing that they need certain assistance from European countries and that can also be done. So if there's discussion about it, that's okay. But I would say these processes are parallel, not against US.
I'm just a sort of final thought.
Yeah, on the question of Russia in the threat, there's been some sort of high profile officials within Russia who've made some threatening sort of gestures sort of the Baltics recently. Do you feel a greater threat from Russia at the moment than you have over the last four years?
How is that developing in your perspective?
I would say that the thread level stays the same. We know that there's no immediate threat. We are prepared. We are well prepared to bonus because our deferense experiences is already five point focus and in the Baltics is the same lot. Weallyituania are doing the same, Poland Thinn sweets. Everybody is well prepared and we have good allies in you K, France, Germany, Poland so on, so we know
what we're up against. But that's it. I would say that Russia is still acute threat to everybody in the civilized word.