PUBLIC OPINION AND NATIONAL DEFENCE · Public opinion and national defence / March 2016 Ministry of...

Pärnu mnt 102, A- korpus, 10116 Tallinn Tel: +372 585 29 700 [email protected]

www.turu-uuringute.eu

PUBLIC OPINION AND NATIONAL

DEFENCE

Ordered by: Estonian Ministry of Defence

Juhan Kivirähk

March 2016

Public opinion and national defence / March 2016 Ministry of Defence

Turu-uuringute AS 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...............................................................................................................2

SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................4

BACKGROUND OF THE SURVEY ................................................................................................9

1 Sample ....................................................................................................... 9

2 Survey ..................................................................................................... 10

3 Performers............................................................................................... 12

RESULTS OF THE SURVEY ......................................................................................................13

1 General attitudes towards life in Estonia and pride in Estonia ................. 13

2 Confidence in institutions ........................................................................ 15

2.1 General background ................................................................................................. 15

2.1 Defence structures ................................................................................................... 16

3 Security and threats ................................................................................ 18

3.1 Security in the world ................................................................................................ 18

3.2 Security in Estonia ................................................................................................... 19

3.3 Threats to world security .......................................................................................... 20

3.4 Threats to Estonia .................................................................................................... 23

3.5 Security guarantees ................................................................................................. 26

4 Defence willingness among the population of Estonia ............................. 28

4.1 Attitudes towards the necessity of resistance ............................................................... 28

4.2 Willingness to participate in defence activities .............................................................. 30

4.3 Desire to leave Estonia in the event of a military threat ................................................ 32

4.4 Ability to act in the event of a potential attack ............................................................. 33

4.5 On which topics do you require more information? ....................................................... 34

5 Defence capability of Estonia ................................................................... 36

5.1 Assessment of the defence capability of Estonia ........................................................... 36

5.2 Views on the volume of defence expenditures .............................................................. 37

5.3 Preparedness for making a personal donation to national defence .................................. 39

5.4 Assessment of state activities in view of the development of national defence ................. 40

5.5 Assessments on the defence of the Estonian border ..................................................... 41

6 Organisation of Estonian national defence ............................................... 42

6.1 Attitude towards conscript service .............................................................................. 42

6.2 Attitudes towards the professional defence forces ........................................................ 46

6.3 Attitude towards the comprehensive approach to national defence ................................. 47

6.4 Tasks of the Defence League ..................................................................................... 48

6.5 Opinions on joining the Defence League ...................................................................... 50

7 NATO ....................................................................................................... 51

7.1 Attitude towards membership in NATO........................................................................ 51

7.2 NATO’s assistance in the event of a potential threat ..................................................... 52

7.3 Assessments to the actions of NATO ........................................................................... 53

8 International military operations ............................................................. 54

8.1 Attitude towards participation in international operations .............................................. 54

8.2 Arguments for participation in international operations ................................................. 55

8.3 Attitudes towards participation in NATO, EU and UN operations ..................................... 57

8.4 Attitudes towards a common border service for the European Union ............................... 58


Turu-uuringute AS 3

9 Attitudes towards professional servicemen ............................................. 59

10 Veteran policy .......................................................................................... 61

11 Information related to national defence .................................................. 63

11.1 National defence instruction in schools ........................................................................ 63

11.2 Supplement Riigikaitse of the daily Postimees .............................................................. 64

12 Media consumption .................................................................................. 65

ANNEXES ...............................................................................................................................68

1 Questionnaire .......................................................................................... 68

2 Summary tables on responses ................................................................. 68

3 Frequency tables with the responses of Estonians ................................... 68

4 Frequency tables with the responses of non-Estonians ........................... 68


Turu-uuringute AS 4

SUMMARY

In March 2016, on the order of the Estonian Ministry of Defence, the Social and Market Research

Company Turu-uuringute AS conducted a public opinion survey on national defence during which

1,203 residents of Estonia from the age of 15+ were interviewed. This was already the thirty-ninth

survey in monitoring public opinion, which was started in 2000.

The assessments given to changes that have taken place in Estonian life show a decrease in the

proportion of respondents who perceive positive changes and an increase in the number of those

who feel that the situation is worsening. In March, 26 per cent of the respondents felt that life in

Estonia is improving and 29 per cent that it is worsening; 41 per cent think that the situation has

remained unchanged.

56 per cent of all respondents feel proud and happy over living in Estonia very often or often

enough, which is 6 per cent more than in last October. The proportion of the respondents who

never feel proud or happy over living in Estonia has remained at 6 per cent throughout the last four

surveys.

Of the ten institutions the reliability of which the respondents were asked to assess, the Rescue

Services rank the highest in trustworthiness (96% trusts them completely or rather trusts them).

This is followed by the Police (86%), the Defence Forces (77%), the Defence League (71%). The

confidence in the state’s political institutions has become negative; the trustworthiness of the

President has decreased as well. The confidence in NATO and the European Union, which are

trusted by more than half of the respondents, places them between Estonian political institutions

and law enforcement agencies.

Estonian-speaking and Russian-speaking respondents’ trust in the state’s political and national

defence institutions differs considerably—at times, Russian-speaking respondents’ indicators are

almost half as low as those of Estonians. The greatest difference occurs in the confidence in NATO,

which is trusted by 75 per cent of Estonians, but only by 21% of Russian-speaking respondents;

the situation is similar with the confidence in the President (62% vs 24%).

The number of people who believe that the world is going to become more unstable and the

likelihood of military conflicts will grow remains high since last spring—this opinion is held by 72%

of the respondents. Only 7 per cent believe that the world is going to become more secure in the

coming decade and 15% think that the situation will remain unchanged.

Respondents perceive the defence situation in Estonia to be somewhat more positive than that of

the world in general, the assessment given to this situation has not changed since last October. 23

per cent of respondents believe that in ten years, the residents of Estonia will be living in more

secure conditions than they do now, 31 per cent presume that the situation will remain unchanged

and 27% predict an increase in insecurity.

For a long time, Russia’s activities to restore its authority were perceived as the main threat to

world security, whereas the current survey reveals that the activities of the Islamic State and the

armed conflict in Syria (67%), the migration of refugees to Europe (63%) and the activities of

international terrorist networks (62%) are considered even more dangerous than Russia. Along with

the armed conflict in Ukraine, which was considered a certain threat to world security by 34% of

the respondents, Russia’s activities to restore its authority (35%) rank as low as the fourth place.

While Estonian and Russian-speaking respondents assess many global threats similarly, there is a

fundamental difference in evaluating the activities of Russia. Estonians rank the threat of Russia as

third (48%), whereas Russian-speaking respondents place it as last (6%).


Turu-uuringute AS 5

Similarly to the preceding surveys, the most probable threats to Estonia, the realisation of which in

the following years is considered probable or quite probable by more than half of the respondents,

are thought to be the following two: 72% of residents think that there may be an organised attack

against the Estonian state information systems (a so-called cyber-attack), 65% believe that some

foreign country may interfere in Estonian politics and economy in order to influence these in their

own interests. The respondents believe that the probability of these two threats has grown since

autumn. An extensive marine pollution is deemed probable by 47% and improbable by 46%, while

the occurrence nationally or religiously motivated conflicts between population groups is considered

probable or improbable by 46% and 49% of the respondents respectively. There was a noticeable

rise in the probability of the latter last autumn and the proportion of the respondents who consider

that threat probable has remained on the same level in March.

In case of other threats, there are more of those who believe them improbable than those who see

them probable. The number of respondents who perceived a military attack against Estonia as

probable began to fall in last October and it continues to decrease: an extensive military attack

against Estonia is deemed likely by 24% of the respondents, while a limited military attack on a

strategic site is seen as probable by 23%.

NATO membership continues to be considered the main security guarantee for Estonia (59%

mention it as one of the three most important factors). Similarly to the preceding surveys, the

development of Estonia’s independent defence capability holds 2nd place (41%), followed by

cooperation and good relations with Russia (29%), which is considered the primary security

guarantee by 57% of Russian-language speakers and 16% of Estonian-speaking respondents.

For Estonian-speaking respondents, the most important security guarantee is clearly the

membership in NATO (75%; 24% of Russian speakers), development of Estonia’s independent

defence capability is in 2nd place (48%; 26% of Russian speakers).

The proportion of people who consider armed resistance necessary in case of a military attack has

increased slightly compared to autumn—81%. Estonian-speaking respondents consider armed

resistance more necessary than non-Estonians (resistance is deemed certainly necessary by 53% of

Estonian-speaking respondents and 33% of Russian-speaking respondents), yet only 15 per cent of

the latter do not consider resistance necessary.

58% of the population would be willing to participate in defence activities to the best of their

abilities and skills: 65% of Estonians and 43% of the Russian-speaking respondents. More than 80

per cent of male citizens under 50 years of age are willing to participate in national defence.

In a situation where Estonia is under attack, every fifth person would consider leaving Estonia.

Women (24% certainly or probably) and younger people up to 39 years of age (about a third) are

most likely to leave Estonia. 32 per cent of Russian-speaking respondents and 14 per cent of

Estonians would probably leave.

The population’s awareness about behaving in an emergency situation is quite low: only 24% would

know what they could do to defend Estonia if there is a threat of attack by a foreign enemy,

whereas 71% do not consider themselves informed enough. People’s awareness has not risen since

spring 2014.

People would like to have more information on how to act in a conflict area as a civilian (42%), how

the public would be informed in case of a threat (41%) and how evacuation would be organised

(36%). Male respondents also show interest slightly greater than the average in questions related

to mobilisation and their responsibilities regarding the participation in national defence.

Assessments to Estonia’s national defence capability have not changed considerably since the last

survey: in the event of an attack by a foreign country, defending Estonia is considered certainly

possible or probably possible by 53% cent of the respondents (63% of Estonians).


Turu-uuringute AS 6

When assessing the volume of Estonian defence expenditures, 25 per cent of the respondents find

that defence spending must be increased and 20% that it should be decreased. The predominant

view is that defence expenditures should remain at the currently achieved level (43%). Estonians’

attitude towards defence expenditures is inversely proportional to that of the Russian-speaking

respondents: 32 per cent of Estonians are in favour of increasing defence expenditures whereas 46

per cent of Russian-speaking respondents support cuts.

35 per cent of Estonians and 12 per cent of Russian-speaking respondents would be certainly or

probably willing to make a financial contribution to support Estonian national defence.

67% of the population provided a positive assessment to the state’s activities regarding the

development of Estonian national defence. Estonians have a more positive attitude towards the

development of national defence than non-Estonians (76% and 48% gave a positive assessment to

the development of national defence, respectively).

While in last autumn, the assessments given to the protection of the Estonian national border were

clearly negative, positive assessments are now in the majority—51% of the respondents perceive it

as good. Still, the number of critical and positive assessments is almost equal among Estonians

(43% and 49% respectively). Only every fifth Russian-speaking respondent (22%) perceives that

there are problems with the defence of the eastern border.

People in Estonia have very favouring attitudes towards conscript service: 91% of respondents

believe that young men need to undergo conscript service, with 63% finding it certainly necessary.

The majority of the respondents think that young men with minor health disorders should undergo

conscript service with an appropriate training load.

The majority of the population disapprove of the evasion of conscript service—22% condemn such

behaviour and 41% consider it negative. Younger age groups are more tolerant than average

towards the evasion of conscript service—more than 50% of people under 30 years of age take an

understanding stance.

In 2013, women were given the opportunity to undergo conscript service voluntarily and this has

been gaining increasingly more understanding in the society—since March 2015, more than half of

the respondents believe it to be certainly necessary or rather necessary. Estonians and younger

respondents have a more contemporary attitude towards the questions of gender equality than

Russian-speaking and older respondents. 68% of Estonians think it is necessary for women to have

the opportunity of undergoing conscript service, whereas only 35% of Russian-speaking

respondents agree. This time, the proportion of respondents in favour of voluntary conscript service

for women has passed the 50 per cent marker in older age groups as well.

Even though the majority of those who consider conscript service for women necessary have

previously thought that this should be done based on a special programme, the proportion of

people who feel that women should undergo conscript service under the same conditions as men is

gradually increasing (48 per cent).

79% of the population prefer maintaining the current concept of national defence based on

professional defence forces together with reserve forces consisting of those who have undergone

conscript service. 14% support waiving compulsory military service and switching to a fully

professional army only.

78 per cent of the respondents (88 per cent of Estonians) believe that such a wider concept of

national defence, which states that national defence is not only the task of armed forces and the

Defence League but a common activity for most state institutions and the entire society, is certainly

suitable or probably suitable for Estonia.

According to the population of Estonia, the main task of the Defence League is to develop national

defence capability, which is considered the most important task by 37% of respondents; 52% when

the three most important tasks are summarised. Participating in rescue activities in the event of

accidents and disasters is mentioned as first by 12% and among the three main tasks by 54%; the

willingness to defend the country and raising defence readiness among the population is considered


Turu-uuringute AS 7

the most important task by 14% of the respondents, whereas 40% see it as one of the three most

important tasks.

While Estonians perceive the Defence League’s national defence tasks as the most important, the

Russian-speaking population mainly sees the Defence League as a civil defence organisation.

Five per cent of the respondents participate in the activities of the Defence League, 24% of the

respondents are connected to the Defence League through a family member or friend. Russian-

speaking respondents are not well-connected with the Defence League—only 5 per cent of the

respondents have a friend or a family member with a connection to the Defence League.

If respondents were to be presented with a proposal to join the Defence League or its associated

organisations, 4% would certainly join and 19% would probably join. The readiness to join is the

highest among younger respondents.

Attitudes towards Estonia’s membership in NATO have not changed compared to autumn 2015:

71% of the population are in favour of it. 89% of Estonians and only 33 per cent of Russian-

speaking respondents support the membership in NATO.

42 per cent of the respondents (53% of Estonians and 19% of Russian-speaking respondents)

believe that NATO will provide direct military aid if Estonia should face a military threat. 15% think

that NATO would limit their help to political and diplomatic support. 22% believe that the

membership in NATO would help to avoid a military conflict and 8% think that NATO would not help

Estonia in any way.

The feeling of security towards NATO’s aid is supported by the steps that have already been taken

to ensure Estonian security and which are supported by the general population: 66 per cent of the

respondents (77% of Estonians) find that NATO has already done enough to ensure Estonia’s

security and 69% of the population (88% of Estonians but only 29 per cent of the Russian-speaking

respondents) favour the presence of NATO’s allied forces in Estonia.

65% of the population believe that units of the Estonian Defence Forces should—in accordance with

their capabilities—participate in international operations in different conflict areas of the world.

Estonians favour the participation of the Estonian Defence Forces in military operations more than

Russian-speaking respondents (75% and 42% respectively). Participation in international military

operations is considered necessary primarily because it provides our soldiers with necessary real

combat experience (mentioned by 65% as one of three reasons) and guarantees NATO’s assistance

to Estonia in the event of potential threats (55%).

More than two thirds of the respondents support Estonia’s involvement in operations conducted

under the aegis of NATO, the European Union and UN. Russian-speaking respondents favour

involvement in the UN missions the most, this is followed by participation in the European Union

operations and, lastly, in missions as a part of NATO units.

68 per cent of the respondents support the creation of a common border service in the European

Union, while 16% oppose it.

Attitudes towards professional servicemen remain positive—66% of the respondents have a very

positive or generally positive attitude towards active servicemen, this includes as many as three

fourths of Estonian-speaking respondents.

Interest in the military field and patriotism are considered to be the main motives for becoming a

professional serviceman. Factors related to self-improvement are also important: it is seen as an

opportunity to receive training and maintain a good physical form. Salary holds the fourth place in

the ranking of importance. The lack of other jobs and long holidays are seen as less important.

In the mind of the society, the word “veteran” is strongly associated with the image of World War II

(55%), as many as 84 per cent of Russian-speaking respondents associate veterans with World

War II. The proportion of the respondents who associate the word “veteran” with the operations of

the Estonian Defence Forces is 17 per cent.


Turu-uuringute AS 8

The majority (68%) of the respondents consider celebrating Veterans’ Day certainly necessary or

rather necessary. The Russian-speaking respondents’ awareness of the celebration is still limited—

36 per cent do not know anything about this day or could not say anything about it. 53 per cent of

the Russian-speaking respondents deemed the celebration of Veteran’s Day necessary, while 75 per

cent of Estonians favour the celebration of this day.

81 per cent of the respondents find that all schools that offer secondary education should certainly

or probably provide the possibility to have national defence instruction. National defence instruction

is highly supported by both Estonian and Russian-speaking respondents, although the proportion of

the Russian-speaking respondents is 10 per cent lower.

16 per cent of the respondents had read the supplement Riigikaitse to the daily Postimees, 3 per

cent of whom read it most of the time and 13 per cent had read it once or twice.


Turu-uuringute AS 9

BACKGROUND OF THE SURVEY

This report has been prepared on the basis of the results of the Omnibus 1000 survey carried out by

Turu-uuringute AS from 1 March till 21 March 2016 and similar earlier surveys. The report will be

submitted to the Estonian Ministry of Defence.

The purpose of the survey was to investigate:

General attitudes towards life in Estonia and pride in Estonia

Confidence in institutions (incl. defence structures) among the population

Residents’ assessments in connection with potential security risks in Estonia and the world

Attitudes in connection with Estonia’s participation in international military operations

Defence willingness among the population and estimated behaviour in the event of potential

threats endangering Estonia

Assessments on Estonia’s defence capability

Attitude towards NATO and its role in ensuring Estonian security

Attitudes both towards compulsory conscript service for men and voluntary conscript service for

women

Attitudes towards the Defence League and understanding its tasks;

Attitudes towards professional servicemen and opinions on the motives for becoming an active

serviceman

Attitudes towards initial national defence instruction in schools.

The first part of the report describes the methodology, the second part presents the results with figures

and comments; the Annex provides the used questionnaire and distribution tables by important

background characteristics.

1 Sample

The survey was carried out in the Omnibus 1000 environment. Omnibus 1000 is a regularly held survey

(following a specific schedule), whose sample comprises of the citizens of the Republic of Estonia with

the age above 15, which totals 1,107,791 people (Statistics Estonia, 01.01.2014).

The usual sample of the Omnibus 1000 is 1,000 respondents. The sample is formed according to the

proportional model of the general sample. This model is based on areas and settlement size

(number of residents), which are used for selecting 100 source addresses (sample points). Within each

area, the source address is selected randomly from the address list of the Population Register.

In addition to the main sample, this survey included an additional sample of 200 respondents to

ensure the better representation of the Russian-speaking population in the sample. Although the

linguistic composition of the population has been weighed according to the actual situation (i.e., by

increasing the effect of Estonian-speaking respondents and decreasing the effect of Russian-speaking

respondents), this additional sample allows to analyse the attitudes and opinions of single Russian-

speaking groups in detail.

The so-called principle of the young man was applied to the selection of respondents at the source

address. This means that at the address of the sample, the interview will be performed with the

household’s youngest male member in the age above 15 who is present at home; if no men are at

home, the interview will be performed with the youngest woman. Such a method grants additional

possibility for participating in the sample to the categories of respondents who are at home less often

(younger people, males) and adjusts the sample to correspond to the population’s actual gender and

age composition.


Turu-uuringute AS 10

Use of the proportional model of the general sample ensures the representativeness of the

sample, in other words, it allows making generalisations about the whole same-age population of

Estonia. The maximum sampling error does not exceed ±3.10% in polling 1,000 persons, the error may

be bigger for smaller subgroups.

The following Table 1 provides sample error limitations at 95% confidence level in assessing the

proportion.

Table 1 Sampling error limitations

2 Survey

The survey method was personal interview, conducted on tablet computers in either Estonian or

Russian, depending on the respondent’s preference. A total of 60 pollers who had been given special

training by Turu-uuringute AS participated in carrying out the survey. A total of 1,203 interviews were

performed. The social and demographic profile of the respondents has been provided in Figure 1.

Summary of the results of the polling (number of addresses visited, reasons for not carrying out the

interview) have been presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Results of the polling

Reasons for not carrying out the interview Total

There are no target group persons in the family 668

Nobody is at home 3240

Target group person is not at home 97

Contact was denied 703

Target group person refused to give the interview 820

Other reasons for not performing the interview 131

Not a dwelling or address inaccessible 249

Summary

Total addresses 7111

Repeated visits 1048

Correctly filled in questionnaires 1203

The statistical analysis software package SPSS for Windows 22.0 was used to process data.

50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 3% 2% 10 30.99% 30.83% 30.36% 29.56% 28.40% 26.84% 24.79% 22.13% 18.59% 13.51% 10.57% 8.68% 20 21.91% 21.80% 21.47% 20.90% 20.08% 18.98% 17.53% 15.65% 13.15% 9.55% 7.48% 6.14% 30 17.89% 17.80% 17.53% 17.07% 16.40% 15.49% 14.31% 12.78% 10.74% 7.80% 6.10% 5.01% 40 15.49% 15.42% 15.18% 14.78% 14.20% 13.42% 12.40% 11.07% 9.30% 6.75% 5.29% 4.34% 50 13.86% 13.79% 13.58% 13.22% 12.70% 12.00% 11.09% 9.90% 8.32% 6.04% 4.73% 3.88% 60 12.65% 12.59% 12.40% 12.07% 11.60% 10.96% 10.12% 9.03% 7.59% 5.51% 4.32% 3.54% 70 11.71% 11.65% 11.48% 11.17% 10.73% 10.14% 9.37% 8.36% 7.03% 5.11% 4.00% 3.28% 80 10.96% 10.90% 10.73% 10.45% 10.04% 9.49% 8.77% 7.82% 6.57% 4.78% 3.74% 3.07% 90 10.33% 10.28% 10.12% 9.85% 9.47% 8.95% 8.26% 7.38% 6.20% 4.50% 3.52% 2.89% 100 9.80% 9.75% 9.60% 9.35% 8.98% 8.49% 7.84% 7.00% 5.88% 4.27% 3.34% 2.74% 110 9.34% 9.30% 9.15% 8.91% 8.56% 8.09% 7.47% 6.67% 5.61% 4.07% 3.19% 2.62% 120 8.95% 8.90% 8.76% 8.53% 8.20% 7.75% 7.16% 6.39% 5.37% 3.90% 3.05% 2.50% 130 8.59% 8.55% 8.42% 8.20% 7.88% 7.44% 6.88% 6.14% 5.16% 3.75% 2.93% 2.41% 150 8.00% 7.96% 7.84% 7.63% 7.33% 6.93% 6.40% 5.71% 4.80% 3.49% 2.73% 2.24% 200 6.93% 6.89% 6.79% 6.61% 6.35% 6.00% 5.54% 4.95% 4.16% 3.02% 2.36% 1.94% 300 5.66% 5.63% 5.54% 5.40% 5.18% 4.90% 4.53% 4.04% 3.39% 2.47% 1.93% 1.58% 500 4.38% 4.36% 4.29% 4.18% 4.02% 3.79% 3.51% 3.13% 2.63% 1.91% 1.49% 1.23% 750 3.58% 3.56% 3.50% 3.41% 3.28% 3.10% 2.86% 2.55% 2.15% 1.56% 1.22% 1.00%

1 000 3.10% 3.08% 3.03% 2.95% 2.84% 2.68% 2.48% 2.21% 1.86% 1.35% 1.06% 0.87% 1 500 2.53% 2.52% 2.48% 2.41% 2.32% 2.19% 2.02% 1.81% 1.52% 1.10% 0.86% 0.71%

Percentage of answers

Sam

ple

siz

e



Figure 1. Respondents’ social and demographic profile, %, n=1,203

46

54

68

32

83

8

2

7

6

16

16

16

19

16

11

15

58

27

69

31

4

9

21

22

19

25

17

23

17

4

6

26

8

32

16

12

11

7

22

0 20 40 60 80 100

GENDER

Male

Female

LANGUAGE OF COMMUNICATION

Estonian

Other

CITIZENSHIP

Estonian

Russian

Other country

Unspecified

AGE

15- 19 y.

20- 29 y.

30- 39 y.

40- 49 y.

50- 59 y.

60- 74 y.

75 and above

EDUCATION

Primary or basic

Secondary, vocational or secondary vocational

Higher

RESIDENCE

City

Rural area

NET INCOME PER FAMILY MEMBER

less than 200 €

201-300 €

301-400 €

401-650 €

More than 650 €

Difficult to say / Refused

MAIN ACTIVITY

Enterpreneur, manager, top specialist

Middle-level specialist, official, executive

Skilled worker, operator

Other employed persons

Pupil, student

Pensioner

Other unemployed

REGION

Tallinn

Northern Estonia

Ida-Viru County

Western Estonia

Central Estonia

Southern Estonia



3 Performers

The persons responsible for various stages of the survey are:

Report, project management: Juhan Kivirähk

Sample/coordination of interviewing work: Kristel Merusk,

Kaja Södor,

Roman Vjazemski.

Data processing and tables: Reijo Pohl

Marina Karpištšenko

Customer’s contact person: Anniki Rebane

Contact information:

General phone: 585 29 700

E-mail: [email protected]

Web-page: www.turu-uuringute.ee

Address: Pärnu mnt. 102, Section A, 11312 Tallinn

Survey leader’s contact information:

Telephone: 5515200

E-mail: [email protected]

http://www.turu-uuringute.ee/



RESULTS OF THE SURVEY

1 General attitudes towards life in Estonia and pride in Estonia

People’s attitudes towards different social questions, including national defence, are considerably

influenced by the positive or negative assessments given to life in Estonia in general.

At the time of the parliamentary elections in the spring of 2015, people’s assessments given to life in

Estonia were improving compared to 2014, yet already in autumn, this was followed by a decline and

the situation has remained the same in spring 2016. The proportion of the respondents who perceive

negative changes has grown by four per cent, the number of respondents who perceive positive

changes or feel that the situation has remained unchanged has decreased (Figure 2).

Russian-speaking respondents’ assessments have become significantly more negative—40 per cent of

them believe that the situation is getting worse (in October 2015, the respective indicator was at 33 per

cent). Estonians’ attitudes have not changed significantly compared to autumn.

Figure 2. Attitudes towards the changes in life in Estonia (%; N = all respondents)

People under 30 years of age and respondents with higher education are more positive about Estonia’s

advancement, more than a third of them perceive positive changes. Assessments are naturally

influenced by the respondent’s economic situation—positive changes are felt to a more than average

extent by people whose income starts from 650 euros per household member per month. More than 40

per cent of the respondents whose monthly income per household member exceeds 650 euros per

month perceive positive changes.

People’s happiness and pride over living in Estonia also depends on how people perceive the changes in

Estonian life.

In this question, the attitudes have improved compared to the previous survey: 56 per cent of

respondents feel proud and happy about living in Estonia very often or often enough (50% in autumn

2015). The proportion of respondents who never feel proud or happy about living in Estonia has

remained at 6% throughout the last four surveys (Figure 3).

20

29

29

36

28

26

34

45

38

37

43

41

40

23

28

23

25

29

6

3

5

4

4

4

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (2016/03)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Changed for the better Remained the same Changed for the worse Don't know



Figure 3. Pride and happiness over living in the Republic of Estonia (%; N = all respondents)

Estonians’ attitudes show signs of improvement. 65% of Estonian-speaking respondents feel proud and

happy very often or often enough (57% in last autumn), while the indicator for people who speak other

languages is 35% (36%). 44% of Russian-speaking respondents experience positive emotions in

connection to living in Estonia only sometimes and 11% do not feel positive about it at all.

Respondents with undetermined citizenship and citizens of Russia are least proud and happy to live in

Estonia—the proportions of those who feel proud and happy very often or often enough are 29% and

31% respectively.

The following table shows how pride and happiness over living in Estonia is connected to the

assessments given to Estonia’s advancement. Positive attitudes towards the general development of

Estonia come with a greater feeling of pride and vice versa—there are significantly fewer people who

feel proud and happy over living in Estonia among those who perceive Estonian development as

negative. As previously revealed, the assessment given to Estonia’s development is closely connected

to the income of the specific respondent.

Table 3 – Link between assessments given to life in Estonia and feelings of pride and

happiness over Estonia

Do you feel proud and happy … Life in Estonia has

changed for

the better

remained

unchanged

changed for

the worse

… over living in Estonia

very often or often enough

never

75%

3%

58%

5%

33%

9%

8

30

16

21

18

23

27

35

29

31

32

33

10

1

5

4

5

4

44

30

44

38

39

34

11

4

6

6

6

6

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (2016/03)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Very often Often enough Don't know Sometimes Never



2 Confidence in institutions

The survey addresses the population’s confidence in several state and international institutions. The

selection of institutions is based on their important role in shaping, implementing or supporting the

Estonian security policy.

2.1 General background

Respondents evaluated the trustworthiness of the institutions using a scale with four categories:

completely trust, rather trust, rather do not trust, and do not trust at all. Of the ten institutions

included in the survey, people have the biggest confidence in the Rescue Services—as many as

96% of the Estonian population trusts them, they are followed by the Police (86%), Defence

Forces (77%) and Defence League (71%) (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Confidence in institutions. (%; N = all respondents)

The confidence in political institutions has decreased significantly—the trust in all political powers in

Toompea has fallen on the negative side; the confidence in the President has decreased as well.

NATO and the European Union, which are trusted by more than half of the respondents, remain

between Estonian political institutions and law enforcement agencies in the ranking of trustworthiness.

The level of confidence in all institutions is higher among the Estonian-speaking population

compared to non-Estonians (Figure 5). Differences are great in case of all institutions, except the

Rescue Services and Police. The greatest differences are revealed in the attitudes towards NATO

(trusted completely or rather completely by 75% of the Estonian-speaking population and 21% of

speakers of other languages), the Defence League (86% vs 37%), President (62% vs. 24%), Prime

Minister (46% vs 21%) and Defence Forces (90% vs 47%).

-53

-50

-48

-42

-37

-30

-11

-14

-10

-2

38

43

44

50

54

58

71

77

86

96

-15

-7

-4

8

17

28

60

63

76

94

-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Prime Minister

Government

Parliament/Riigikogu

President

European Union

NATO

Defence League

Defence Forces

Police

Rescue Service

Distrust compeletely/rather Trust completely/rather Balance



Figure 5. Confidence in institutions in the eyes of the Estonian-speaking and foreign-

speaking population (% of those who trust the institutions completely and rather trust them; N = all

respondents)

Compared to October, the confidence in the President has decreased the most among Estonian-

speaking respondents (from 74 per cent to 62 per cent). The trust in the Government, Parliament and

Prime Minister has fallen 7–8 per cent.

Russian-speaking respondents show most mistrust in NATO, the Prime Minister and President—the

confidence in them has decreased 3–4 per cent compared to October 2015.

2.1 Defence structures

The Defence Forces, which holds 3rd place in the trustworthiness ranking after the Rescue Services,

2nd place in the trustworthiness ranking of Estonians, was trusted by 77% of the population of

Estonia as at March 2016—the same level as it was in the two surveys conducted last year (Figure

6).

While the trustworthiness of the Defence Forces has remained at a constantly high level for years

(slightly under or over 90 per cent) among the native speakers of Estonian, the Russian-speaking

respondents’ trust in the Defence Forces continues to decline since last spring. Ever since Estonia joined

NATO, the confidence in the Defence Forces has never been so low among Russian-speaking

respondents.

This is probably affected by the information from the Russian mass media, which undoubtedly

influences the attitudes towards Estonian Defence Forces with its active criticism aimed at Western

countries and NATO.

21

32

35

24

44

21

37

47

80

91

46

49

49

62

60

75

86

90

89

98

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Prime Minister

Government

Parliament/Riigikogu

President

European Union

NATO

Defence League

Defence Forces

Police

Rescue Service

Estonians Non-Estonians



Figure 6. Confidence in the Defence Forces in 2000–2016; comparison of the assessments by

the Estonian-speaking and foreign-speaking population (% of those who trust it completely or

rather trust it; N = all respondents)

The Defence League is placed among the most trustworthy institutions right after the

Defence Forces—as at March 2016, 71% of the Estonian population trusted the Defence

League (Figure 7).

With the Defence League too, the non-Estonians’ trust pattern is similar to that of the Defence Forces—

even though this spring, the Russian-speaking respondents’ confidence in the Defence League remains

on the same level as it was in last autumn, it has been in clear decline since spring 2014. According to

the current survey, the Defence League is trusted by 86% of Estonians and 37 per cent of the Russian-

speaking respondents.

Figure 7. Confidence in the Defence League in 2000–2016; a comparison of assessments by

the Estonian-speaking and foreign-speaking population (% of those who trust it completely or

rather trust it; N = all respondents)

5864

59

6874 71 73 73

67

75 7579

7476 74

80 7884

79 8176

81 8180 83 83

7679

7582

84 83 8278 78

77

53

58

56

6773

64

74

8479 81 79

74

82 8480

85 8481

85 8487 89 88 87

91 90 90 91 9288

9186

90 90 92 93 90 91 90

3935

40 4045

4954

4952 53

61

52

6055 56

50

58 60

6865

75

6066

48

5962

5862 62

4953

48

60

6762

58

49

51

47

0

20

40

60

80

100

01/2

000

05/2

000

10/2

000

02/2

001

06/2

001

10/2

001

03/2

002

06/2

002

10/2

002

02/2

003

06/2

003

10/2

003

02/2

004

06/2

004

10/2

004

03/2

005

06/2

005

11/2

005

05/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016

TOTAL Estonians Non-Estonians

3945

4248

5357 58 58 56

5956 54

58 59 57

6865 66

6265 64

6864

6871

68 67 6964

74 75 73 7471 70 71

39 41 39

4854

5055

64 64 66 64 6568 67 66 67 67 66

7774 74

77 79 77 7975

80 82 8279

84

76

85 85 8589

86 85 86

2023 22 22

25 2730

23

40 4045

36 3832 31

34

4138

4742

46

33 33 34

43 42 42 4337 38

35 36

4851

4642 40

36 37

0

20

40

60

80

100

01/2

000

05/2

000

10/2

000

02/2

001

06/2

001

10/2

001

03/2

002

06/2

002

10/2

002

02/2

003

06/2

003

10/2

003

02/2

004

06/2

004

10/2

004

03/2

005

06/2

005

11/2

005

05/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016

TOTAL Estonians Non-Estonians



3 Security and threats The third chapter provides an overview of security issues: what kind of situation is expected to occur in

the world and Estonia in the coming decade, which threats to Estonia are considered probable by the

population in the coming years, and what would help to ensure the security of Estonia.

3.1 Security in the world

The question about world security was presented in the following wording: What do you think, will

the world become more secure and the risk of military conflicts reduce, or, conversely, will

the instability increase in the world and the probability of military conflicts grow in the

coming decade?

The number of people who believe that instability and the probability of military conflicts will

grow in the world in the coming decade has remained at over 70 per cent since last spring

(Figure 8). Only 7% believe that the world is becoming more secure in the coming decade while 15%

think that the situation will remain unchanged. The long term trend has been presented on Figure 9.

Figure 8. Situation in the world in the coming decade, 2013–2016 comparison (%; N = all

respondents)

Figure 9. Situation in the world in the coming decade; 2000–2016 comparison (%; N = all

respondents)

11

5

8

7

7

7

23

11

20

15

16

15

55

80

66

70

71

72

11

4

6

8

6

6

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Situation will become more secure

Situation is not going to change

Increased risk of military conflicts/ situation less secure

Don't know

25 23

12 14 15 1317 17 18

13

20

12 13 1512 12 14

1215

117

1114

1815

914 13 12

15 1510 8 7 7 7

40

25

53

43 41

4750

41

34

4340

51 49 4744

50

56

4348 48

65

56

45 44 44

63

49

57 56

4650

6266

70 71 72

0

20

40

60

80

01/2

000

06/2

001

10/2

001

03/2

002

06/2

002

10/2

002

02/2

003

06/2

003

10/2

003

02/2

004

06/2

004

10/2

004

03/2

005

06/2

005

11/2

005

05/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016

Situation will be more secure Increased risk of military conflicts



Estonians and non-Estonians assess the state of world security differently.

Estonians are more sensitive about the world’s security risks—as many as 80% believe that the

situation is worsening. 55% of Russian-speaking respondents share that view, yet compared to

Estonians, there are more people who think the situation will remain unchanged (23% in comparison to

11% of Estonians). Only 5 per cent of Estonians and 11 per cent of the Russian-speaking respondents

believe that the world could become more secure in the coming years.

3.2 Security in Estonia

The question about the security in Estonia was presented in the following wording:

What do you think, what will the situation in Estonia be? Will the population be living in

more secure or insecure conditions in ten years from now?

The security situation in Estonia is perceived to be more positive compared to the situation

in the world in general. Similarly to the assessments given to security in the world, the public

opinion has remained largely unchanged on this matter as well. 23 per cent believe that in ten years,

Estonian citizens will be living in more secure conditions than now; 27 per cent, or four per cent less

than in last autumn, predict an increase in insecurity. The proportion of the respondents who could not

say anything has grown equally.

Figure 10. Situation in Estonia in the coming decade, 2012–2016 comparison (%; N = all respondents)

Compared to Russian-speaking respondents, Estonians also believe Estonia’s future to be bleaker: 30

per cent of Estonians (4 per cent less than in October 2015) predict a growth in insecurity, the

respective figure for Russian-speaking respondents is 24%. 24% of Estonians and 19% of Russian-

speaking respondents believe the future to be more secure. Compared to Estonians, more Russian-

speaking respondents think the situation is most likely to remain unchanged (36 per cent vs 29 per

cent of Estonians).

19

24

20

26

32

23

23

36

29

40

35

32

31

31

19

30

34

26

19

31

27

26

17

6

13

17

15

19

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/03

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Situation will become more secureSituation is not going to changeIncreased risk of military conflicts/ situation less secureDon't know



3.3 Threats to world security

The respondents were asked to assess the effect various factors have on peace and security in the

world.

The most important threats pointed out by the respondents are the activities of the Islamic

State and the military conflict in Syria (67%), the immigration of war refugees to Europe

(63%) and the activities of terrorist networks (62%).

Russia’s attempts to restore its authority over the former Soviet territories are seen slightly less

dangerous than the armed conflict in Ukraine, even though the latter is also orchestrated by Russia.

The answer “to some extent” highlights almost all other threats listed in the question. The respondents

feel the least threatened by the spread of epidemics and China’s growing influence in the world (Figure

11).

While Estonians and Russian-speaking respondents assess many global threats similarly, there is a

fundamental difference in the assessment of steps taken by Russia to restore its authority over

the former Soviet territories and the armed conflict in Ukraine. For Estonians, these occupy the

fourth and fifth places on the threat scale (48% and 39% of Estonians see these as a certain threat,

respectively), yet Russian-speaking respondents place it last (Russia’s activities are seen as a certain

threat by 6% and the conflict in Ukraine by 24% of the Russian-speaking respondents). 65% of the

Russian-speaking respondents do not see Russia as a threat to world security (Figure 12).

Nevertheless, the threat of Russia has decreased in the eyes of Estonians, who place it after the Islamic

State, the arrival of refugees in Europe and the activities of terrorist networks. In last spring, 46% of

Estonians still considered Russia’s activities to be the number one threat among factors threatening

world security.

Compared to Estonians, Russian-speaking respondents see the military capability of the US and the

spread of epidemics more dangerous. Estonians tend to consider other threats slightly more important.



Figure 11. Dangers to peace and security in the world in 2016 (%; N = all respondents)

6764

44

63

6259

44

3539

46

3437

3234

31

2940

26

2730

27

2631

22

261921

2425

21

1722

15

2726

37

32

3133

40

3330

25

4743

5547

48

5243

47

4441

41

5245

47

454641

5046

44

4543

40

44

9

3

34

9

272525

1413

79

12

1512

20

191822

1413

18

2426

29

2122

27

2320

25

26

10

2

44

7

564

56

689

457

101110

81113

999

579

1515

20

0% 50% 100%

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/03

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/032015/10

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/032015/102015/03

2016/032015/102015/03

Certainly To some extent Certainly not Don't know

Activities of the Islamic State

The migration of refugees to Europe

Activities of the terrorist network

Russian activities in

restoring its authority over the former Soviet

territories

Armed conflict in Ukraine

Global economis crisis

Organised crime

Economic and military

capability of the USA

Contradictions between

rich and poor countries

Spread of epidemics

Global climate change

Increase in the economic and military capability of China



Figure 12. Dangers to peace and security in the world in 2016, answers “this certainly” (%; comparison of Estonian-speaking and foreign-speaking respondents)

23

18

23

22

27

30

33

39

48

64

65

70

32

14

25

38

24

26

29

24

6

58

59

62

0 20 40 60 80

Spread of epidemics

Increase in the economic andmilitary capability of China

Global climate change

Economic and military capability of the USA

Contradictions between rich and poor countries

Organised crime

Global economis crisis

Armed conflict in Ukraine

Russian activities in restoring its authority

Activities of the terrorist network

The migration of refugees to Europe

Activities of the Islamic State

Non-Estonians Estonians



3.4 Threats to Estonia

The respondents were presented with 12 different potential threats and asked to assess the probability

of their occurrence in the forthcoming years (Figure 13).

There are two main threats, the occurrence of which more than a half of the respondents considered

very or rather probable in Estonia in the forthcoming years: 72% of people think there might be an

organised attack (a so-called cyber-attack) against the Estonian state information systems and 65%

believe that a foreign state may interfere in Estonia’s policy or economy in their own

interests. The respondents deemed the occurrence of these threats more probable compared to the

survey conducted in autumn.

The following two threats are considered more or less equally probable and improbable: 47% consider

an extensive marine pollution probable, while 46% of the respondents think it improbable and the

respective indicators for the probability of clashes on ethnic or religious grounds between population

groups are 46% and 49% respectively. While the proportion of respondents who consider an extensive

marine pollution probable has been declining from year to year, the number of those who think clashes

on ethnic or religious grounds are likely to occur is growing. This figure grew significantly last autumn

and the proportion of the respondents who consider the threat probable has not changed since then.

When it comes to other threats, there are more respondents who consider them improbable than those

who deem them probable. An attack on Estonian citizens in a foreign country is considered very or

rather probable by 39% (52% deem it improbable), large-scale street riots by 33% (61%), economic

collapse of the Republic of Estonia by 28% (63%) and a nuclear disaster in a nuclear power plant close

to Estonia by 27% (62%). Still, the proportion of respondents who consider these threats probable has

increased compared to the autumn survey.

While in autumn 2013, 13 per cent of Estonians and 10 per cent of Russian-speaking respondents

considered a limited or large-scale military attack against Estonia probable, then by spring 2015, the

respective proportions had risen to 30 and 36 per cent respectively. In last October, the proportion of

people who consider a military attack probable started to decrease and the trend continues: a large-

scale military attack against Estonia is considered probable by 24% (26% in autumn) and a limited

military attack on some strategic site by 23% (26%).

Of the threats listed, an explosion of an oil train passing through Estonia or an explosion of an oil

terminal was considered most improbable—only 17 per cent. The assessments given to this threat are

probably influenced by the knowledge of a decrease in railway transits.

Even the assessment of Estonia’s internal dangers reveals important differences in view of the

respondents’ main language of communication (Figure 14). Estonians consider most of the dangers

more probable than the Russian-speaking respondents. The only exceptions are the economic

collapse of the Republic of Estonia and an extensive marine pollution, which Russian-speaking

respondents find more probable than Estonians.

The Estonian respondents find cyber-attacks (respectively 84% and 47%), a foreign state’s interference

to influence Estonia’s policy or economy in their own interests (68% vs. 56%), a large-scale military

attack (29% and 15%) or a limited military attack against a strategic site (27% and 15%) and attacks

on the citizens of Estonia in a foreign country (43% and 33%) considerably more probable than

Russian-speakers.



Figure 13. Probability of different threats endangering Estonia in the forthcoming years,

2014–2016 comparison (%; N = all respondents)

1

3

2

3

4

4

3

3

6

7

3

3

3

2

3

3

6

4

4

6

3

4

5

5

4

4

9

7

9

7

8

8

6

5

11

9

8

9

9

7

23

20

23

22

28

27

26

29

25

20

19

17

25

26

23

20

27

29

23

21

20

20

18

24

15

16

18

22

27

22

25

28

23

24

28

31

30

31

29

31

23

29

34

37

45

41

41

40

42

41

38

43

44

44

43

43

7

8

9

9

9

10

10

11

6

7

7

5

7

7

9

11

6

9

8

9

4

6

5

6

5

6

7

7

10

11

7

9

4

6

5

5

4

7

6

7

6

8

7

7

6

7

6

8

53

50

51

54

43

40

45

45

41

39

46

49

50

49

50

46

48

45

41

40

51

50

49

47

55

52

47

47

36

31

35

34

49

41

38

37

36

37

37

40

23

23

24

22

16

15

19

15

14

19

19

17

19

20

19

21

20

18

21

22

20

22

20

16

25

26

29

23

15

18

16

14

13

14

10

8

15

20

21

18

18

19

12

12

7

6

7

6

6

8

8

6

6

7

6

5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Explosion of a fuel train or in an oil terminal

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Limited military attack against a strategic site

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Large-scale military attack by a foreign country

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Nuclear disaster at a nuclear power station

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Economic collapse of Estonia

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Mass street riots

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Act of terrorism

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Attack on the citizens of Estonia in a foreign country

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

between population groups

Clashes on ethnic or religious grounds

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Extensive marine pollution

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

policy or economy

Foreign state interfering into Estonia's

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

against the Estonian state information systems

Organised attacks (cyber-attacks)

Very probable Rather probable Don't know Rather improbable Completely improbable



Figure 14. Probability of different threats endangering Estonia in the forthcoming years;

comparison of the assessments among the Estonian-speaking and Russian-speaking population (%; N = all respondents)

33

33

15

14

65

36

68

610

510

97

1823

1536

1320

1224

1424

1728

2521

2331

2833

2733

2543

4240

3845

3248

0 20 40 60 80 100

OtherEstonian

Explosion of a fuel train or in an oil terminalOther

EstonianLimited military attack against a strategic site

OtherEstonian

Large-scale military attack by a foreign countryOther

EstonianNuclear disaster at a nuclear power station

OtherEstonian

Economic collapse of EstoniaOther

EstonianMass street riots

OtherEstonian

Act of terrorismOther

EstonianAttack on the citizens of Estonia in a foreign country

OtherEstonian

between population groupsClashes on ethnic or religious grounds

OtherEstonian

Extensive marine pollutionOther

Estonianpolicy or economy

Foreign state interfering into Estonia'sOther

Estonianagainst the Estonian state information systems

Organised attacks (cyber-attacks)

Very probable Rather probable



3.5 Security guarantees

Estonia’s membership in NATO was among the important factors that would ensure maximum

security to Estonia according to the respondents, similarly to previous surveys, (listed as first)—this is

mentioned as one of the important factors by 59% of the respondents and the result is mainly achieved

with the help of Estonian respondents: while 75 per cent of Estonians consider NATO the main security

guarantee, the respective indicator among the Russian-speaking respondents is 24 per cent (Figure

15).

It is followed by the development of Estonia’s own independent defence capability, which is

mentioned as one of the main security guarantees by 41% of Estonian residents. Even here there is a

fundamental difference between the assessments given by Estonians and Russian-speaking

respondents: the development of independent defence capability is considered among the three most

important security guarantees by 48% and 26% of the respondents respectively (there is a significant

decrease in the assessments of the Russian-speaking respondents—the indicator was 34% in autumn).

Mostly due to the impact of respondents speaking other languages, these two factors are followed by

cooperation and good-neighbourly relations with Russia, which are pointed out by 57 per cent of

Russian-speaking respondents and only 16 per cent of Estonians. The support for the defence

cooperation with the Baltic States (23%) is more or less equal among the two language groups.

However, the Russian-speaking respondents value the membership in the European Union, the UN and

OSCE considerably more than Estonians.

The support for the permanent presence of allied forces in Estonia and the alliance with the US has

reached 20 per cent (both were at 16% in autumn). These guarantees are mostly valued by Estonians.



Figure 15. Security guarantees for Estonia (up to 3 of the most important factors); comparison of the assessments among the Estonian-speaking and foreign-speaking

population (%; N = all respondents)

6

5

16

21

14

24

9

5

22

57

26

24

2

9

4

8

15

16

25

27

23

16

48

75

3

7

8

12

15

18

20

20

23

29

41

59

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Don't know

Participation in international military operations

Membership in OSCE

Membership in UN

Defence cooperation with the Nordic countries

Membership in European Union

Good relations and cooperation with the USA

Permanent presence of allied forces in Estonia

Defense cooperation between Baltic states

Cooperation and good relations with Russia

Development of Estonia's independent defence capabilities

Membership in NATO

ALL Estonians Non-Estonians



4 Defence willingness among the population of Estonia

Defence willingness among the population of Estonia is measured with three questions. The so-called

passive defence willingness is expressed through the opinion on whether Estonia should be defended in

case a foreign enemy attacks (“If Estonia is attacked by any country, should we, in any case, provide

armed resistance, regardless of the attacker?”), active defence willingness is expressed through the

person’s willingness to participate in national defence with his/her own skills and competence (“If

Estonia is attacked, are you ready to participate in defence activities using your own competence and

skills?”). The proportion of those expressing the will to leave Estonia in case of an attack is also

mapped. Defence willingness is also related to the topics of how much the people are informed about

the ways in which one can protect Estonia in the event of a possible attack.

4.1 Attitudes towards the necessity of resistance

In the event of a foreign attack against Estonia, armed resistance is regarded certainly necessary by

47% and probably necessary by 34% of the population (Figure 16). Thus, a total of 81% of the

population is in favour of military resistance, while it is regarded as unnecessary by 11% of

the population. The proportion of the respondents who consider resistance necessary has increased

by two per cent compared to October.

Estonian-speaking respondents tend to consider armed resistance slightly more necessary than non-

Estonians (certainly necessary according to 53% of the Estonian-speaking and 33% of the Russian-

speaking population, respectively), while only 15% of the latter believe that resistance is not necessary

(the number of people who answered “cannot say” is the same).

The number of respondents expressing passive defence willingness has remained at slightly over or

under eighty per cent throughout the last surveys.

Figure 16. Necessity for the provision of armed resistance, if Estonia is attacked by any country (%; N = all respondents)

The long term trend of considering armed resistance necessary has been presented on Figure 17 (for

the entire population) and Figure 18 as a comparison of Estonians and Russian-speaking respondents.

33

53

41

49

43

47

35

33

38

34

36

34

17

5

10

6

8

8

9

7

7

7

9

8

6

2

4

4

4

3

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (2016/03)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Yes, certainly Probably yes Don't know Probably not Certainly not



Figure 17. Necessity of armed resistance if Estonia is attacked by any country; 2000–2016

comparison (%; N = all respondents)

Figure 18. Proportion of the proponents of armed resistance in the event of an attack;

comparison of the Estonian-speaking and foreign-speaking population 2006–2016

(% of those considering resistance certainly and probably necessary; N = all respondents)

It is evident that Estonian and Russian-speaking respondents have periods where their defence

willingness is equal and periods where the Russian-speaking respondents willingness to resist a foreign

attacker is lower. The first of these periods can be linked to the time after the Bronze Night events, the

current situation may be connected to the decline in the relations between Russia and NATO.

68

56 5966

61 64 6559

69 6964 64

71 6864 66 67 66 69 69

78 7773 71

78 77 77 74 74 7378

7379 79 82 79

8379 81

1926 29

22 24 23 23 23 25 2430 31

23 24 24 25 24 24 20 2416 12

17 1915 14 17 18 19 17 17

2217 17 15

11 11 13 11

0

20

40

60

80

100

01/2

000

05/2

000

10/2

000

02/2

001

06/2

001

10/2

001

03/2

002

06/2

002

10/2

002

02/2

003

06/2

003

10/2

003

02/2

004

06/2

004

10/2

004

03/2

005

06/2

005

11/2

005

05/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016

We should certainly/probably provide armed resistance We certainly/probably shouldn't provide armed resistance

6977 80 77 73

79 79 80 79 8075

8174

78 79 82 8389

82 81

69

80

7063 66

7773

6862 63

68 70 71

83 80 83

70 71 71 68

0

20

40

60

80

100

09

/20

06

12

/20

06

06

/20

07

01

/20

08

08

/20

08

01

/20

09

05

/20

09

01

/20

10

09

/20

10

08

/20

11

10

/20

11

03

/20

12

10

/20

12

03

/20

13

10

/20

13

03

/20

14

11

/20

14

03

/20

15

10

/20

15

03

/20

16




4.2 Willingness to participate in defence activities

The number of those willing to participate personally in defence activities is lower than the proportion of

those supporting armed resistance at the state level. While armed resistance is considered necessary

by 81%, 58% of the population would be willing to participate in defence activities to the

extent of their own capabilities and skills (Figure 19). This is three per cent more than in autumn

2015.

29% of the population of Estonia would be certainly willing and 29% probably willing to participate in

defence activities. 34% of the respondents would certainly or probably not be willing to personally

contribute to defence activities.

The difference between the attitudes of Estonians and people who speak other languages is even more

noteworthy in the question of active defence willingness compared to passive defence willingness. While

65% of Estonians would be willing to participate personally in defence activities, the

respective indicator for non-Estonians is only 43%.

When interpreting defence willingness, it should be considered that participation in national defence has

been a traditionally male task, and, consequently, the readiness to contribute is inevitably lower among

female and older respondents (for instance, only 39 per cent of respondents over 60 years of age would

be willing to participate in defence activities while the respective proportion of respondents under 20

years of age is 66 per cent). Additionally, the percentage of Russian-speaking respondents remains

lower than average because conscript service is not compulsory for non-citizens. This, however, is a

prerequisite for participating in armed resistance.

The awareness of personal contribution possibilities other than participating in armed resistance will be

discussed in the fourth part of this chapter (4.4).

Figure 19. Willingness to participate in defence activities if Estonia is attacked (%; N= all respondents)

Defence willingness is seen in a more positive perspective when we only look at men’s willingness to

participate in defence activities: 80 per cent of the male citizens aged 15–64 are willing to participate in

national defence. Defence willingness is lower among Russian-speaking male citizens compared to

Estonian men. 70 per cent of Russian-speaking male citizens under 35 and 50–64 years of age would

be willing to personally participate in national defence, while less than a half of those aged 35–49 would

be willing to do so.

18

41

15

35

26

29

27

29

29

29

28

30

30

30

28

29

10

5

13

5

9

8

9

8

20

12

18

15

20

16

19

16

23

13

26

15

15

17

17

18

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Female

Male

GENDER (03/2016)

Russian

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03




Table 4 – Willingness to certainly or probably participate in defence activities among male citizens by age groups

LANGUAGE OF

COMMUNICATION

15-34 35-49 50-64 65+

Estonian 84% 88% 81% 52%

Russian 69% 41% 70% 31%

ALL men / citizens 81% 82% 80% 49%

If we view the temporal change of participatory willingness by nationality and citizenship, it becomes

evident that, in 2006, defence willingness among non-Estonians with Estonian citizenship was at a

comparable level with that of Estonians. After the Bronze Night events in 2007 this willingness dropped

significantly both among non-Estonians with Estonian citizenship and those without citizenship (Figure

20). The years 2013–2014 saw an improvement in the defence willingness among non-Estonian

citizens, but in the last four surveys this willingness has once again fallen under 50 per cent.

Figure 20. Proportion of the population willing to participate in defence activities in the

event of an attack; comparison of the Estonian-speaking and foreign-speaking population

2000–2016 (% of those certainly and probably willing to participate; N = all respondents)

67

6063 61

67

61

68 67 69 73

70

6973

70 7174

71 70

64 6469

66

71 7074

69 71

62

70

6266 64

6865

67

60

68

62 64

53

40

52 5451

50

59 57

66

71

74

66

65 64 6358

64 6357

64

65 60

48 46

53

42

54 52 51

3943

40

55 54 54

45 4744

47

43

33

44

52

44

61

59

49

6663 61

57 5963

56 58 5963

51 51

56

49

43 4144

52

52 52

46

36 3538 39 38 36

45

3843

39

0

20

40

60

80

01/2

000

05/2

000

10/2

000

02/2

001

06/2

001

10/2

001

03/2

002

06/2

002

10/2

002

02/2

003

06/2

003

10/2

003

02/2

004

06/2

004

10/2

004

03/2

005

06/2

005

11/2

005

05/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016

Estonians Non-Estonians/citizens Non-Estonians/non-citizens



4.3 Desire to leave Estonia in the event of a military threat

In case Estonia is attacked, one fifth of Estonians (19%) would consider leaving Estonia: in

such a situation, 5% would certainly endeavour to leave and 14% would probably do it (Figure 21). The

proportion of those who would like to leave has decreased by three per cent compared to October. 72%

of the population would certainly not or probably not endeavour to leave Estonia in the event of a

threat.

The people most prone to leave Estonia are women (certainly or probably 24%) and younger people up

to 39 years of age (approximately one third). 32% of Russian-speaking respondents and 14% of

Estonians would probably leave Estonia.

Figure 21. Probability of leaving Estonia in case Estonia is attacked (%; N = all respondents)

When taking into account the whole data from the beginning of the survey series, it can be seen that

the Russian-speaking respondents have expressed higher willingness to leave since the year 2007; the

willingness rose to as high as 42 per cent in 2013 and has then remained close to 30 per cent since

2014. Estonians’ willingness to leave was also slightly higher during the recession years from 2010 to

2013, when one fifth of Estonians would have considered leaving (Figure 22).

Figure 22. Proportion of those desiring to leave Estonia in the event of an attack; comparison

of the Estonian-speaking and foreign-speaking population 2000–2016 (% of those desiring to leave certainly and those who would probably do it; N = all respondents)

6

4

10

3

7

6

6

5

18

11

22

11

15

14

16

14

10

7

12

7

8

11

10

9

29

32

26

33

30

29

30

31

37

46

30

46

40

40

38

41

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Female

Male

GENDER (03/2016)

Russian

Estonian

LANGUAGE(03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03


12 13

17 1613

1512 12

15

11 11 10

1513 13 13

15 1513 13 13

1012

16 15 14

2017

2118 19 20 19

21

1619

16 1614

1922

2523

1821

14

1821

15 1619

24

2022

24 25 24

16

24

1316

21 23 2426 25

27 27

3638

42

37

3330 30 31 32 32

0

20

40

60

01/2

000

05/2

000

10/2

000

02/2

001

06/2

001

10/2

001

03/2

002

06/2

002

10/2

002

02/2

003

06/2

003

10/2

003

02/2

004

06/2

004

10/2

004

03/2

005

06/2

005

11/2

005

06/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016




4.4 Ability to act in the event of a potential attack

In order to obtain an overview of the population’s awareness in terms of defence, the respondents were

asked to tell whether they considered themselves to be adequately informed about what to do in the

event of an impending foreign attack. The results show that, people consider their ability to act in

the event of a potential attack rather poor: only one fourth would know what they could do for

defending the state in such circumstances but 71% say that they are rather not informed of certainly

not informed about this (Figure 23). The results of the past few surveys reveal that people’s awareness

of the ways to participate in national defence continues to be low.

Figure 23. Being informed about the possibilities of what to do for defending Estonia in the event of an impending foreign attack (%; N = all respondents)

Men consider their awareness to be higher than women (34% vs 16%)—this could be explained by

more contacts with national defence structures (conscription, the Defence League). Estonians are

somewhat more informed than Russian-speaking respondents.

4

8

10

6

14

14

3

14

7

9

7

10

7

8

10

18

15

15

22

24

13

20

12

18

15

17

18

16

8

5

5

3

1

2

5

3

6

3

4

4

6

5

30

37

44

50

45

42

39

42

36

42

42

42

40

40

48

32

26

26

18

18

40

21

39

28

32

27

29

31

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

60 +

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

15-19

AGE (03/2016)

Female

Male

GENDER (03/2016)

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE(03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Yes, sufficiently/I know for sure Generally yes/ I know Don't know Rather not Certainly not



4.5 On which topics do you require more information?

As throughout the surveys the population has assessed its level of being informed as very low in view

of the topic of what to do in the event of a foreign attack, in November 2014 we included a question

about the topics regarding the state’s activities and organisation of personal life on which people

require the most information in the event of a foreign attack (Figure 24). Respondents had to choose

three topics most important to them out of nine given topics.

Figure 24. On which topics do you require more information? — 2014–2016 comparison (%; N = all respondents)

The three most important topics which were highlighted in both surveys and on which further

information is needed are related to the role of civilians in case of a conflict: how to act when one

has entered a combat zone as a civilian, how the general public is informed, and how

evacuation is organised.

The information needs of male and female respondents differ to an extent.

Even though men are also concerned with the three topics listed as the most important in the general

ranking, they show greater than average interest in how the mobilisation will be organised, how a

civilian can contribute to supporting the military and what the respondent’s obligations are in national

defence. Women would like more information on evacuation, how to act as a civilian and solve basic

everyday problems (Figure 25).

14

17

20

20

26

30

40

43

45

11

16

19

18

21

28

41

44

44

11

15

17

21

22

27

38

42

40

10

16

18

18

21

31

36

41

42

0 10 20 30 40 50

What are my obligations concerning national defence in my workplace

How will public services be available and which ones

How can I support the military as civilian

What are you obligations in national defence

How is the mobilisation organised

How are primary household problems solved

How will the population be evacuated from the battle area

How will the public be informed

How to act in the event when you have entered a battle area as a civilian

March 2016 Oct. 2015 March 2015 Nov. 2014



Figure 25. On which topics do you require more information? Comparison of men and women March 2016 (%; N = all respondents)

11

15

21

23

26

27

30

43

35

8

17

16

13

16

35

40

39

47

0 10 20 30 40 50

What are my obligations concerning national defence in my workplace

How will public services be available and which ones

How can I support the military as civilian

What are you obligations in national defence

How is the mobilisation organised

How are primary household problems solved

How will the population be evacuated from the battle area

How will the public be informed

How to act in the event when you have entered a battle area as a civilian

Female Male



5 Defence capability of Estonia

The fifth chapter reflects attitudes within the population in relation to Estonia’s defence capability, the

volume of defence expenditures and the state’s activities regarding the development of national

defence.

5.1 Assessment of the defence capability of Estonia

Respondents were asked to say whether they think Estonia is defendable until help arrives from the

allies in the event of an armed foreign attack. Since autumn 2014, the proportion of respondents who

believe that it would be possible to defend Estonia in the event of an armed foreign attack has

reached over 50 per cent. The proportion of those respondents who find that Estonia cannot be

defended is one third of all the respondents—in March 2014, the respective proportion was still 46%

(Figure 26). Nevertheless, the public confidence in Estonia’s defence capability has not increased in the

last couple of years.

Figure 26. Assessment of the defence capability of Estonia in the event of an armed foreign attack (%; N = all respondents)

Estonians give a more positive assessment to Estonia’s defence capability—more than 60 per cent

regard Estonia defensible. The assessments of Russian-speaking respondents reveal that those who do

not regard Estonia defensible are in the lead by ten per cent, nearly one fourth of the Russian-speaking

respondents say that they do not have a view in this question.

6

17

9

12

14

13

13

28

46

38

39

42

40

40

23

8

7

17

12

15

13

28

25

37

25

24

25

26

15

4

9

7

8

7

8

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/03

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03




5.2 Views on the volume of defence expenditures

Assessments given to the volume of Estonian defence expenditures reveal that a majority of the

respondents think that defence expenditures should be kept at the current level (Figure 27). An

increase in defence expenditures is favoured by 25% and decrease by 20% of the

population.

After joining NATO, there was a period when a third or even greater proportion of the population

considered an increase in defence expenditures necessary, which lasted for a few years. At the time,

there was a lot of talk about the necessity to conform to NATO requirements and raise defence

expenditures up to 2 per cent of GDP. The support for an increase in defence expenditures dropped

during the recession years and it has remained stable throughout the last two surveys.

Figure 27. Views on the volume of defence expenditures; 2004–2016 comparison (%; N = all

respondents)

The average attitudes of the population do not give a full overview of the public opinion. Estonians’

attitude towards defence expenditures is inversely proportional to that of the Russian-

speaking respondents: there are more supporters of decreasing the volume of defence

expenditures among Russian-speaking residents than there are of supporters of increasing it

among Estonians (Figure 28). However, the number of those in favour of increasing defence

expenditures among Russian-speaking respondents is equal to Estonians wishing for a decrease.

In March 2016, 31% of Estonian-speaking residents and 10% of residents who speak other languages

were of the opinion that the volume of defence expenditures should be increased; 8% of Estonian

speakers and 46% of foreign language speakers were in favour of expenditure cuts.

5 5 4 6 7 6 9 9 6 7 8 124 3 4 4 6 6 4 5 4 6 7 7 8 5 5

25 23 2126 27 27

3527 33 30 26

28

2215

22 2315

2117 18 18

2025 22

2520 20

45 50 5345

46 44

3745 40

39 4543

47

52

51 48

48 35 45 4448 45

4747 38

44 43

1110 9 10

9 12 8 9 10 13 119

910

9 10

1318 8 10

10 9

6 911 12 12

9 8 7 8 7 7 8 6 7 7 6 5

9 119 10

12 1116 15

12 1210 6 10 11 11

5 4 6 5 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 39 9 5 5 7 9 10 9 7 7 5 9 8 8 9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

02

/20

04

06

/20

04

10

/20

04

03

/20

05

06

/20

05

11

/20

05

06

/20

06

09

/20

06

12

/20

06

06

/20

07

01

/20

08

08

/20

08

01

/20

09

05

/20

09

01

/20

10

09

/20

10

08

/20

11

10

/20

11

03

/20

12

10

/20

12

03

/20

13

10

/20

13

03

/20

14

11

/20

14

03

/20

15

10

/20

15

03

/20

16

Increase significantly Increase by a certain amount Maintain at the current level

Don't know Decrease by a certain amount Decrease significantly



Figure 28. Views on the volume of defence expenditures; comparison of the Estonian-speaking and non-Estonian-speaking population 2006–2016 (%; N = all respondents)

41

47 4742

49

32 24

3033

27

3529 28 29

33

4037

43

33 3223

18 15 1519 11

4

17 13

7

11

4 107 9

11 11 129 10

9 7 6 4 4

1012

9 9

11

9

15 1511 13

9 5 7 78

15

2319 20 20

35 36

2428

35

45

52

4239

35

3137

44 45 46

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016

Estonians favouring an increase in expenditures Non-Estonians favouring an increase in expenditures

Estonians favouring defence cuts Non-Estonians favouring defence cuts



5.3 Preparedness for making a personal donation to national

defence

Many people do not seem to realise that there is a direct connection between their own income and

appropriations from the state budget—increasing or decreasing budgetary spending on national defence

seems relatively abstract to them. The preparedness for making a personal donation to national

defence is a much better indicator of people’s attitudes towards the need to strengthen national

defence.

The survey reveals that 28 per cent of the respondents would be certainly or probably willing to

make a contribution. 63 per cent of the respondents would probably or certainly not make a donation to

national defence. These proportions have remained unchanged throughout the last four surveys, which

indicates the stability of the willingness to donate (Figure 29).

35 per cent of Estonians would be willing to make a financial contribution to national defence, whereas

only 12 per cent of the Russian-speaking respondents are willing to do so.

Figure 29. Preparedness for making a personal donation to Estonian national defence (%; N = all respondents)

3

4

6

6

5

4

9

31

22

23

23

24

9

8

9

8

9

9

23

28

29

29

27

26

56

29

34

34

36

37

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2015/03




5.4 Assessment of state activities in view of the development of national defence

In spring of 2014, 73% of the population provided a positive assessment to the state’s activities in view

of the development of national defence and the figure dropped to 71% by October last year, yet now

the number of positive assessments has dropped while the proportion of those who answered “cannot

say” has increased. The answer was often chosen by Russian-speaking respondents (Figure 30).

Similar to other national defence surveys, the Estonian-speaking population values activities related to

national defence development higher than non-Estonians (76% and 48%, respectively, regard state

activities in developing national defence as good).

Figure 30. Assessments of state activities in recent years in view of the development of Estonia’s national defence (%; N = all respondents)

8

9

7

7

10

10

9

40

67

66

55

60

61

58

35

12

10

23

17

17

20

12

11

15

13

11

9

11

5

1

2

2

2

3

2

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/03

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Very well Rather well Don't know Rather badly Very badly



5.5 Assessments on the defence of the Estonian border

In 2014, the kidnapping of the Estonian Internal Security Service officer Eston Kohver by the Russian

special services on the Estonian-Russian border resulted in the public discussion on how well the

temporary border line between Estonia and Russia is guarded.

In autumn, after the incident on the border, the majority of the assessments given to this question

were clearly negative, whereas by now, the assessments are predominantly positive (Figure 31).

Only 22 per cent of Russian-speaking respondents are critical about the defence of the Estonian border,

the respective indicator for Estonian respondents is slightly over 40 per cent.

Figure 31. Assessment on the defence of the Estonian border (%; N = all respondents)

9

2

6

6

6

4

49

47

30

39

41

47

20

8

11

12

11

13

16

34

37

33

31

28

6

9

16

10

11

8

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Very good Rather good Don't know Rather bad Very bad



6 Organisation of Estonian national defence

The sixth chapter discusses various aspects of national defence organisation in Estonia: what are the

attitudes towards conscript service (including the necessity of it being compulsory to young men and

voluntary for young women, evasion of conscript service and inclusion of young people with minor

health disorders), whether is it more appropriate for Estonia to maintain its current defence concept or

transfer to a fully professional army, what are the opinions about comprehensive national defence, and

what are the main tasks of the Defence League.

6.1 Attitude towards conscript service

6.1.1. Necessity of conscript service for young men

Estonian population continues to have a very favourable attitude towards conscript service for young

men: 91% of all respondents believe that young men need to undergo conscript service. Only

7% of the population considers conscript service rather or totally unnecessary. Undergoing conscript

service is considered certainly necessary by 71% of the Estonian-speaking respondents and 46% of the

Russian-speaking respondents (Figure 32).

The most dedicated supporters of conscript service are people over 60 years of age, but the number of

supporters is over 40 per cent even among people under 30, who are influenced by the conscript

service the most, while only one tenth consider it unnecessary.

Figure 32. Attitude towards the necessity of conscript service (%; N = all respondents)

The proportion of the population who consider undergoing conscript service necessary or rather

necessary for young men has remained at a very high level over the years (since 2005, in the range of

85–95%) (Figure 33).

78

71

64

54

45

41

46

71

63

18

24

28

36

37

31

37

23

28

2

2

1

4

1

2

5

1

2

1

2

4

5

11

19

8

4

5

1

1

3

1

6

7

4

1

2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

60+

50-59 y.

40-49 y.

30-39 y.

20-29 y.

15-19 y.

AGE

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE

TOTAL

Certainly necessary Rather necessary Don't knowRather unnecessary Completely unnecessary



Figure 33. Attitude towards the necessity of conscript service; 2005–2016 comparison (%; N = all respondents)

Since 2012, the respondents have been additionally asked to assess whether young men who have

minor health disorders should also be subject to conscript service. 10% of the respondents believe that

such young men should certainly undergo conscript service; however, 63% of the respondents think

that young men with minor health disorders should undergo conscript service with an

appropriate training load (Figure 34). The public opinion has not changed much in this matter in the

last few years.

The most significant differences occur in view of the language of communication. 44% of Russian-

speaking respondents hold the opinion that young men with minor health disorders should not undergo

conscript service, while only 13% of Estonian speakers share the same opinion. 71% of Estonians find

that these young men should undergo conscript service with an appropriate training load.

Figure 34. Attitudes towards undergoing conscript service regarding young men with minor health disorders (%; N = all respondents)

87 88 88 86 8590 91 90 93 94 93

89 92 92 93 95 93 92 94 94 93 91

11 10 10 11 138 6 8 6 6 6 8 7 7 7 5 6 7 5 6 6 7

0

20

40

60

80

100

06/2

005

05/2

006

09

/20

06

12

/20

06

06

/20

07

01

/20

08

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01

/20

10

09

/20

10

08

/20

11

10

/20

11

03

/20

12

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03

/20

14

11

/20

14

03

/20

15

10

/20

15

03/2

016

Certainly/rather necessary Completely/rather unnecessary

4

13

11

12

11

10

46

71

66

62

61

63

44

13

19

23

25

23

5

3

4

3

3

4

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Yes, certainly Yes, but with appropriate load No Don't know



6.1.2. Evasion of conscript service

Bearing in mind the favouring attitudes of the population towards conscript service, it is fully

anticipated that the majority of the population in Estonia disapproved of the evasion of

conscript service—22% condemn such behaviour and 41% consider it negative (Figure 35). 30% of

respondents have an understanding attitude towards the evasion of conscript service, while only 2% of

the respondents approve of this.

The evasion of conscript service finds disapproval with 69% of the Estonian-speaking respondents and

with 49% of the Russian-speaking respondents. Compared to younger respondents, the evasion of

conscript service is condemned more by senior respondents—more than half of people under the age of

30 express understanding in this matter.

Figure 35. Attitude towards the evasion of conscript service (%; N = all respondents)

Similarly to expressing the necessity of conscript service, there have been no major changes in the

assessments of the question regarding the evasion of conscript service over the years (Figure 36).

Figure 36. Attitude towards evading conscript service; 2011–2016 comparison (%; N = all

respondents)

30

25

26

17

13

6

17

24

22

48

45

34

44

32

29

32

45

41

4

6

9

5

4

10

10

4

5

17

24

29

32

48

47

38

26

30

1

1

2

3

7

3

1

2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

60-74 y.

50-59 y.

40-49 y.

30-39 y.

20-29 y.

15-19 y.

AGE

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE

TOTAL

You condemn it You have a negative attitude Don't know You understand it You approve it

24

27

28

24

25

25

26

23

26

25

22

39

41

44

41

47

44

45

44

42

41

41

6

5

3

4

2

3

3

5

6

7

6

31

26

25

30

25

27

25

27

25

26

30

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2011/08

2011/10

2012/03

2012/10

2013/03

2013/10

2014/03

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

You condemn it You have a negative attitude Don't know You understand it You approve it



6.1.3. Conscript service for women

The opportunity for women to undergo conscript service voluntarily has been gaining

increasingly more understanding in the society—since March 2015, more than a half of the

respondents have thought it certainly necessary or rather necessary.

Estonians and younger respondents have a more contemporary attitude towards the questions of

gender equality compared to the Russian-speaking and older respondents. 68% of Estonians think it is

necessary for women to have the opportunity of undergoing conscript service, whereas only 35% of the

Russian-speaking respondents agree. The attitudes of respondents over 50 years of age have become

more positive as well—in October 2015, more than half of them did not consider voluntary conscript

service for women necessary, yet now the support of women’s conscript service has risen over 50 per

cent in said age group (Figure 37).

Figure 37. Attitude towards the necessity of conscript service for women

(%; N = all respondents)

The respondents who considered conscript service for women certainly or rather necessary were asked

about in which form the conscript service should take place. The respondents were given three options:

compulsory conscript service, conscript service under the same conditions as applied to young men and

conscript service through a separate programme. The previous surveys have always been dominated by

the view that women should undergo conscript service through a separate programme, but now it is

about to be beaten by the opinion that conscript service should take place under the same

conditions as applied to young men (48%) (Figure 38).

14

13

16

21

27

25

7

23

11

16

15

18

39

39

41

40

38

33

28

45

31

36

36

39

6

7

6

7

3

7

8

5

6

5

6

5

24

27

27

25

27

22

34

22

31

25

28

26

17

14

10

7

5

13

23

6

21

18

15

12

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

60+ y.

50-59 y.

40-49 y.

30-39 y.

20-29 y.

15-19 y.

AGE (2016/03)

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (2016/03)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

Certainly necessary Rather necessary Don't knowRather unnecessary Completely unnecessary



Figure 38. Which form should conscript service for women take?

(%; N = all respondents who considered conscript service for women necessary)

6.2 Attitudes towards the professional defence forces

Despite the fact that more than 90% of respondents find conscript service necessary, the topic of

making the transition to a professional army is sometimes raised in political debates. Respondents were

asked to tell whether they think Estonia should waive compulsory conscription service and maintain a

professional army only, or maintain the current system in which the professional army is combined with

a reserve force consisting of persons having undergone conscript service. The results of the survey

reveal that 79% of the population would prefer maintaining the current system, with the

reserve forces included (Figure 39). Switching to a fully professional army and waiving compulsory

conscript service is favoured by 14% of the population. Similarly to other questions concerning the

organisation of national defence, this viewpoint has been very stable over the years.

Figure 39. Options preferred for the development of Estonia’s defence concept; 2006–2016 comparison (%; N = all respondents)

* In surveys conducted in 2011, another wording of the question was used, with the reply options: “Estonia should maintain the general obligation for military service based on conscription” and “Estonia should switch to a professional army”.

1

1

0

0

1

3

2

0

1

1

2

1

2

1

45

51

43

55

48

45

50

48

40

50

34

35

42

48

47

44

51

41

44

47

45

46

51

44

51

57

50

46

7

4

6

4

7

5

3

6

8

5

13

7

6

5

Female

Male

Gender (2016/03)

60-74 y.

50-59 y.

40-49 y.

30-39 y.

20-29 y.

15-19 y.

AGE(2016/03)

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (2016/03)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

compulsory same conditions as men separate programme don't know

63

77 7871

77 7583 81

7263

79 80 81 78 83 84 82 82 79

32

19 19 2316 19

12 1422 25

17 14 15 17 13 11 13 11 14

0

20

40

60

80

100

05/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011*

10/2

011*

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016

Maintain the current system in which the professional army is combined with a reserve force consisting of persons having undergone consript service

Waive the obligation for military service based on conscription and maintain a professional army only



6.3 Attitude towards the comprehensive approach to national

defence

Starting from spring 2014, the survey includes a question about the strategy of Estonian national

defence according to which national defence is no longer only the task of the Defence Forces and

Defence League but the joint task of most state authorities and the entire society. 78% of

respondents (88% of Estonians) are of the opinion that the comprehensive approach is certainly

or probably suitable for Estonia (Figure 40). The contrary opinion was shared by less than one tenth

of the respondents.

Figure 40. National defence is not only the task of the Defence Forces but the task of most state authorities and the whole society. Is such a comprehensive approach to national defence suitable for Estonia? (%; N = all respondents)

Since the comprehensive approach to national defence is regarded as positive and widely supported, it

is high time to provide people with more specific details. As previously shown, very few people seem to

have an understanding of how to act in case of a possible crisis and how to contribute to national

defence to the extent of their own capabilities and skills.

29% of the Russian-speaking respondents answered “cannot say”, which indicates that the introduction

of a comprehensive national defence concept has not managed to sufficiently penetrate the Russian-

speaking information space. Moreover, 22 per cent of Russian-speaking Estonian citizens cannot answer

that question either.

15

44

33

28

34

33

35

42

44

45

44

44

43

43

29

7

8

18

13

15

14

9

5

10

7

8

7

6

5

0

2

3

1

2

2

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

03/2014

11/2014

03/2015

10/2015

03/2016




6.4 Tasks of the Defence League

The Defence League has been given a very important role in the national defence strategy. The

respondents were asked to pick the three most important tasks of the Defence League from a list

provided to them. The results were fixed in sequence, i.e., the most important reason first, followed by

the second and the third.

The Defence League’s most important task is considered to be creating capabilities for the military

defence of the state—this task is listed as first by 37% of the respondents. However,

participation in rescue operations in the event of emergencies and disasters holds the first

place in the overall summary of the three tasks (54%). Raising both defence willingness and

readiness among the population (14%) is the second most popular first choice, and it occupies the

third position in the overall summary of the three tasks with 40% (Figure 41).

The other important tasks besides the three abovementioned ones are preparing for civil defence in

emergency situations (38%), participating in national security crisis management (35%) and organising

the military education of the youth (28%).

The public understanding of the tasks of the Defence League remains very stable as well—the order in

which the tasks are ranked has been similar through several surveys.

Figure 41. Main tasks of the Defence League (%; N = all respondents)

When it comes to listing the tasks of the Defence League in the order of importance, there are several

differences between the opinions of the Estonian-speaking and Russian-speaking population. Estonians

mainly consider the Defence League a national defence organisation, the main task of which is creating

capabilities for the military defence of the state (46% place it first and 61% place it among the three

most important tasks) and raising the defence willingness and readiness of the population (17% name

it first; 48% place it among the three most important tasks) while the Russian-speaking population see

the Defence League primarily as a civil defence organisation.

4

4

3

8

7

14

12

37

6

9

9

13

12

20

20

8

2

9

16

14

19

6

22

7

12

22

28

35

38

40

54

52

Participation in military missions outside Estonia

Creation of broad support for the defence forces in the civil society

Organisation of the military education of the youth

Participation in national crisis management

Organised preparation for protecting the civilian population in emergaency situations

Raising both the defence willingness and readiness among the population

Participation in rescue operations in the event of emergencies and disasters

Establishment of capabilities for the military defence of the state

First Second Third TOTAL



For Russian-speaking respondents, the Defence League’s main tasks are participation in rescue

operations in the event of emergencies and disasters (21% of Russian-speaking respondents name it as

first and 65% place it among the three most important tasks) and organised protection of civilians in

emergency situations (10% place it first and 58% place it among the three most important tasks)

(Figure 42).

Figure 42. The three main tasks of the Defence League by language of communication (%; N = all respondents)

13

21

22

28

58

24

65

32

12

22

31

36

30

48

50

61

12

22

28

35

38

40

54

52

Participation in military missions outside Estonia

Creation of broad support for the defence forces in the civil society

Organisation of the military education of the youth

Participation in national crisis management

Organised preparation for protecting the civilian population in emergaency situations

Raising both the defence willingness and readiness among the population

Participation in rescue operations in the event of emergencies and disasters

Establishment of capabilities for the military defence of the state

TOTAL Estonian Russian



6.5 Opinions on joining the Defence League

5% of the respondents (6 per cent of Estonians) participate in the activities of the Defence League

themselves, 24% (32 per cent of Estonians) are connected to the Defence League through a family

member or friend.

The number of Russian-speaking respondents connected to the Defence League is marginal—only 5%

have a friend or family member who is connected to the Defence League.

The respondents who were not the members of the Defence League or related organisations were

asked for their opinion on joining the Defence League.

4% of the respondents would certainly join the Defence League or Naiskodukaitse (Women’s

Voluntary Defence Organisation), and 19% would probably join (Figure 43). The Russian-

speaking respondents remain reserved even in the question of joining: only 7 per cent would certainly

or probably join. 6 per cent of Estonian respondents would certainly join and 25 per cent would

probably join.

The Defence League should certainly rejoice in the fact that the willingness to join is higher among the

younger respondents.

Figure 43. Willingness to join the Defence league or Naiskodukaitse (%; N = those who are not yet members of the Defence League or related organisations)

2

4

6

4

4

8

3

5

1

6

5

5

5

4

8

17

19

20

29

46

14

25

6

25

19

19

18

19

12

13

17

21

13

13

13

15

20

12

12

12

15

15

17

29

22

34

35

14

25

26

23

27

26

28

28

25

61

37

36

21

19

19

45

28

50

31

38

36

34

37

60+

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

15-19

AGE (03/2016)

Female

Male

GENDER (03/2016)

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE(03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

will certainly join will probably join don't know probably will not join certainly will not join



7 NATO

The seventh, NATO-related chapter provides an overview of the population’s attitude towards Estonia’s

membership in NATO, their views on the role of NATO in providing security to Estonia and the ways in

which the steps NATO has taken to ensure Estonian security in the world’s new security situation are

assessed.

7.1 Attitude towards membership in NATO

In March 2016, the Estonian membership in NATO was favoured by 71% of the population,

with 40% being certainly in favour of the membership and 31% being rather in favour. 19% of Estonian

residents are against NATO membership; one tenth of the population have no view in this matter

(Figure 44).

Figure 44. Attitudes towards joining NATO / membership in NATO, comparison of 2001–2016; (%; N = all respondents)

While 89% of the Estonian-speaking respondents are in favour of NATO membership, the indicator for

the Russian-speaking respondents is considerably lower, only 33 per cent. 48% of the Russian-speaking

respondents are against Estonia belonging to NATO and 18% have no specific opinion in this matter

(Figure 45).

Figure 45. Proportion of the proponents of joining NATO / membership in NATO; comparison of the Estonian-speaking and foreign-speaking population 2000–2016 (% of those certainly and rather in favour of the aforementioned; N = all respondents)

48 4954 53

5854

6369 66 69

74 72 7478

73 74 76 7571 73 75 73 71

80 78 7671

75 7279 76 79

75 72 72 71

32 3126 25 22

3228

23 2621

16 18 1814

18 19 17 17 17 15 17 18 2013 13 14

19 20 1915 17 17 18 21 19 19

0

20

40

60

80

100

02/2

001

06/2

001

10/2

001

03/2

002

06/2

002

10/2

002

02/2

003

06/2

003

10/2

003

02/2

004

06/2

004

10/2

004

03/2

005

06/2

005

11/2

005

05/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016

Certainly/rather in favour Certainly/rather against it

57 54 5663 61

66 6569

6573 76

81 8387 86 88 89

84 87 86 88 89 90 89 90 8993

8983

8793

86 89 8894 93 91 91 89

25

35

2420 20

3127 29

3339

52

3338

44 4642

51 4843

5144

33 37 3935

31

50 4844

34 3440

5247 44

3731 31 33

0

20

40

60

80

100

01/2

000

05/2

000

10/2

000

02/2

001

06/2

001

10/2

001

03/2

002

06/2

002

10/2

002

02/2

003

06/2

003

10/2

003

02/2

004

06/2

004

10/2

004

03/2

005

06/2

005

11/2

005

06/2

006

09/2

006

12/2

006

06/2

007

01/2

008

08/2

008

01/2

009

05/2

009

01/2

010

09/2

010

08/2

011

10/2

011

03/2

012

10/2

012

03/2

013

10/2

013

03/2

014

11/2

014

03/2

015

10/2

015

03/2

016




7.2 NATO’s assistance in the event of a potential threat

As previously revealed, the majority of the population considers NATO Estonia’s main security

guarantee (chapter 3.5). Nevertheless, in the past years, the general public has for several times

brought up the question of whether NATO’s Article 5 really is going to be invoked in case of a real

military threat. Over the years, people have become increasingly more certain that NATO will provide

military aid in the event of Estonia facing a military threat. An increase in the actual presence of allied

forces in Estonia has undoubtedly contributed to this sense of security.

42 per cent of the respondents find that NATO would provide direct military assistance in the

event of an impending threat to Estonia, 15% believe that NATO would limit its aid only to political

and diplomatic support. 22% think that membership in NATO would be able to prevent a military

conflict completely and 8% believe that there is no hope for help from NATO. (Figure 46)

The Estonian-speaking respondents’ trust in NATO’s support is considerably higher than that of the

Russian-speaking respondents, which very likely originates from the attitude towards the membership

in the alliance. While 53% of Estonians believe in NATO’s military support, the same belief is shared by

only 19% of the Russian-speaking population. The same proportion of the Russian-speaking

respondents believe that there is no hope for help from NATO, more trust is placed in NATO providing

political and diplomatic aid (23%). Only 3 per cent of Estonians believe that NATO’s collective defence

does not work.

Figure 46. Role of NATO in ensuring Estonia’s security if Estonia is exposed to military threat (%; N = all respondents)

19

53

44

43

51

48

45

42

23

11

23

18

13

15

15

15

19

3

10

11

10

8

10

8

15

26

19

24

17

18

19

22

24

7

5

4

9

11

11

13

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2013/10

2014/03

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

provide direct military assistance limit to political and diplomatic support no hope of help from NATO

would prevent a military conflict Don't know



7.3 Assessments to the actions of NATO

Since November 2014 we have also studied the attitude of the Estonian population towards actions

already taken by NATO to ensure better security for Estonia.

The respondents were asked whether NATO has taken sufficient measures in today’s security situation

(Figure 47) and how the presence of NATO allied forces in Estonia is perceived (Figure 48).

Figure 47. Has NATO taken sufficient measures to ensure the security of Estonia? (%; N = all respondents)

The assessments given to steps taken by NATO for ensuring security in Estonia are predominantly

positive, 66% of the surveyed, including 77% of Estonians, consider these completely sufficient

or generally sufficient. NATO’s activities are seen as sufficient by 43% of the Russian-speaking

respondents, yet the proportion of those who are not able to express an opinion is almost equal.

However, Russian-speaking respondents are predominantly negative about the presence of

NATO allied forces in Estonia (56%), whereas almost 90% of Estonians are in favour of it.

Figure 48. What is your attitude towards the presence of NATO allied forces in Estonia? (%; N = all respondents)

14

18

16

21

20

17

29

59

53

49

49

49

41

14

16

18

19

23

9

7

11

9

9

8

7

2

4

3

3

3

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

completely sufficient sufficient in general don't know

rather not sufficient completely not sufficient

8

49

32

35

33

36

21

39

38

33

35

33

15

5

6

7

7

8

28

6

15

14

13

13

28

1

9

11

12

10

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

certainly in favour rather in favour don't know rather against certainly against



8 International military operations

The eighth chapter maps the attitudes towards participation in international military operations: how

necessary Estonia’s participation is in such operations according to the population, what the reasons for

Estonia to participate are and what the respondents’ attitudes towards the Estonian Defence Forces’

operations as part of NATO, European Union and UN units are.

8.1 Attitude towards participation in international operations

65% of the population of Estonia believe that the Estonian Defence Forces units should—in

accordance with their capabilities—participate in international military operations; 22% of

respondents feel that it should be certainly done (Figure 49). 28% of the Estonian population see no

need for participation in international operations.

There is a significant difference between the Estonian and Russian-speaking respondents’ attitudes

towards international military operations. 75 per cent of Estonians are in favour of participating in

international operations, only 42 per cent of Russian-speaking respondents feel the same. These figures

have also changed very little in the last few years.

Figure 49. Should Estonian units participate in international military operations? (%; N = all respondents)

10

27

15

17

19

19

22

32

48

45

47

41

43

43

12

5

4

9

7

8

7

22

12

23

15

18

16

15

24

8

13

12

15

14

13

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/03

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

yes, certainly probably yes don't know probably not certainly not



8.2 Arguments for participation in international operations

Respondents were asked to select the three most important reasons why Estonia should participate in

international military operations from a list provided to them. The results were fixed in sequence, i.e.,

the most important reason first, followed by the second and the third.

Two of the most important reasons were almost equally highlighted: 30 per cent of the respondents

consider participation in international operations the most important because it it gives our soldiers

necessary real combat experience and 29 per cent because it ensures NATO’s assistance in the

event of a potential threat to Estonia. Our soldiers receiving combat experience remains the most

significant argument if the three most important reasons are summarised (Figure 50).

Other arguments for participating in international operations highlighted by the respondents include

contributing to world peace (one of the three most important reasons according to 35%), protecting

people in crisis areas (35%) and Estonia taking the opportunity to have a say in world politics (30%).

28% of the respondents place preventing the spread of conflicts into Estonia among the three most

important arguments.

Figure 50. The most important reasons why Estonia should participate in international military operations (%; N = all respondents)

Similarly to the differences in the Estonian and Russian-speaking respondents’ attitudes towards

participation in international military operations, their understanding of the reasons for participating in

said operations differs as well.

The argument that participation in military operations ensures NATO’s assistance in case of a military

conflict remains less relevant for the Russian-speaking respondents. While 37% of Estonians name it as

the first reason with 67% considering it among the three most important arguments, the respective

indicators for Russian-speaking respondents are only 12% and 29%.

32% of Estonians name combat experience as the first reason and 70% place it among the three most

important reasons and while Russian-speaking respondents believe this motive to be the most

important as well, it is highlighted only by 24% and 50% respectively.

1

2

4

2

4

8

29

30

2

4

10

10

15

13

17

26

4

11

12

18

16

14

9

9

6

15

7

17

26

30

35

35

55

65

Do not know

Nothing can justify participation

Helps to spread democratic values in the world

Participation in foreign missions is the responsibility of every democratic country

Helps to prevent the spread of conflicts into Estonia

Gives Estonia an opportunity to have say in world politics

Protects people in crisis regions

Contributes to ensuring peace in the world

Ensures NATO's assistance in the event of potential threats to Estonia

Gives our soldiers necessary real combat experience

First Second Third TOTAL



However, compared to Estonians, Russian-speaking respondents place more value on so-called

humanitarian arguments: contributing to world peace, protecting people in crisis areas, spreading

democratic values. Russian-speaking respondents also support the view that participation in military

operations is part of a democratic state’s duties to a greater extent than Estonians do (Figure 51).

31% of Russian-speaking respondents believe that none of the named arguments justify participation in

foreign military operations.

Figure 51. The most important reasons why Estonia should participate in international military operations (%; N = all respondents)

7

17

26

30

35

35

55

65

10

23

26

30

35

39

29

50

7

15

25

30

35

31

67

70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Helps to spread democratic values in the world

Participation in foreign missions is the

responsibility of every democratic country

Helps to prevent the spread of conflicts into

Estonia

Gives Estonia an opportunity to have say in

world politics

Protects people in crisis regions

Contributes to ensuring peace in the world

Ensures NATO's assistance in the event of

potential threats to Estonia

Gives our soldiers necessary real combat

experience

Estonian Russian TOTAL



8.3 Attitudes towards participation in NATO, EU and UN operations

Since Estonian servicemen have participated in military operations as part of NATO, EU and UN units,

we were curious of whether there is a difference in the public’s attitudes towards operations conducted

under the auspices of different organisations.

There are no great differences compared to the survey conducted in October 2015. Russian-speaking

respondents clearly continue to favour participation in the UN and EU missions over those of NATO

(Figure 52).

Figure 52. Attitudes towards the units of Estonian Defence Forces participating in international operations (%; N = all respondents)

14

29

22

24

8

28

18

21

7

36

21

27

39

45

45

43

39

46

45

44

28

46

43

40

14

12

11

13

15

11

12

13

15

7

9

9

15

10

11

11

17

10

13

12

22

8

12

12

18

4

11

9

21

5

12

10

28

4

15

12

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other 03/2016

Estonians 03/2016

ALL 10/2015

ALL 03/2016

UN operations

Other 03/2016

Estonians 03/2016

ALL 10/2015

ALL 03/2016

EU operations

Other 03/2016

Estonians 03/2016

ALL 10/2015

ALL 03/2016

NATO operations

certainly in favour rather in favour don't know rather against certainly against



8.4 Attitudes towards a common border service for the European Union

Since the European migrant crisis has deepened the cooperation between the EU countries’ police and

border service, there has been increasing talks of the necessity to create a common border service for

the European Union. The public would greenlight the creation of such structure: 68 per cent supports

the creation of a common border service while 16 per cent of the respondents oppose it.

The idea appears to be more obscure for Russian-speaking respondents—23 per cent are not able to

form an opinion in this matter. 60 per cent, however, take a supportive stance (72 per cent of

Estonians).

Figure 53. Attitudes towards the proposal of a common border service for the European Union (%; N = all respondents)

support

completely26%

rather

support42%

rather do

not support11%

do not

support at all

5%

don`t know

16%



9 Attitudes towards professional servicemen

The attitudes towards professional servicemen continue to be positive. 66% of the respondents,

including as many as three fourths of Estonians, have a very positive or generally positive

attitude towards active servicemen (Figure 54).

Figure 54. Attitudes towards professional servicemen (%; N = all respondents)

Once again, we asked the public’s opinion about the reasons of becoming a professional serviceman.

Interest in the profession of a serviceman and patriotism are considered to be the main motives

for becoming a professional serviceman. Factors related to self-improvement are also considered

important: becoming a serviceman is seen as an opportunity to receive training and maintain

good physical form. Good salary holds the fourth place in the ranking of importance. The lack of

other jobs and long holidays are regarded less important (Figure 55).

17

17

18

18

20

11

49

51

51

49

55

37

24

24

26

28

19

36

7

5

2

3

4

12

2

2

1

1

2

4

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

2013/10

LANGUAGE (2016/03)

Estonian

Other

Very good Rather good Neither good nor bad, neutral Don't know Rather bad



Figure 55. Motives for becoming a professional serviceman (%; N = all respondents)

54

55

54

42

43

39

40

39

37

41

42

41

26

28

26

23

24

25

20

24

14

25

26

18

16

16

16

22

23

24

27

29

29

32

32

35

26

28

31

26

26

28

28

28

29

25

27

28

20

19

22

13

16

18

13

10

16

16

15

21

16

15

19

16

16

17

26

21

26

27

27

28

26

22

29

20

20

23

20

21

27

3

3

4

6

4

8

4

5

4

5

4

7

10

10

12

9

8

13

12

10

16

16

14

17

17

14

16

3

2

1

4

3

2

3

2

2

4

2

2

7

8

7

5

4

3

8

8

11

12

12

17

17

16

17

5

7

1

5

6

2

5

7

2

8

8

2

5

7

2

9

9

2

9

9

3

7

9

3

17

17

6

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Interest in the profession of a serviceman

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

Patriotism, desire to defend your country

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

Opportunity to receive training at an international level

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

Opportunity to earn a good salary

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

Opportunity to maintain good physical form

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

Desire to contribute to world peace

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

Desire for variety in life, spirit of adventure

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

Lack of other jobs

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

Long holidays

2016/03

2015/10

2014/03

5 - certainly yes 4 3 2 1 - certainly not Don't know



10 Veteran policy

In the last four surveys, respondents were also asked whether they associate the word “veteran”

primarily with World War II, the Estonian War of Independence, or the Estonian Defence Forces’

operations in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. The responses show that more than a half of the

population associates the word “veteran” primarily with World War II (Figure 56). As many as 84

per cent of the Russian-speaking respondents associate veterans with World War II (41% of Estonians).

17% of Estonians associate the word “veteran” with the Estonian War of Independence (even though

none of those veterans are alive now) and the proportion of those who associate the world

“veteran” with servicemen who have participated in the Estonian Defence Forces’ operations

shows a slight increase (from 16 to 23 per cent within a year). Only five per cent of the Russian-

speaking respondents consider the servicemen who have participated in those operations veterans.

Those 6 per cent of respondents who claimed that the word “veteran” is associated with some other

option most often noted that the word “veteran” should refer to the participants of all wars.

Figure 56. What are the primary associations with the word "veteran" (%; N = all respondents)

The Veterans’ Day held on 23 April (St. George’s Day) each year since 2012 is considered certainly

necessary or rather necessary by the majority of the respondents (68 per cent)—no matter

what they consider the meaning of the word “veteran” to be (Figure 57). Russian-speaking population’s

awareness of this day is low—36 per cent do not know anything about this day or cannot say anything

about it. 53 per cent of Russian-speaking respondents considered the celebration of this day necessary.

75 per cent of Estonians are in favour of celebrating the Veterans’ Day.

84

41

52

59

53

55

2

17

16

15

15

12

5

23

14

11

17

17

3

7

7

5

4

6

6

12

11

10

11

10

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (2016/03)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

World War II Estonian War of Independence Estonian Defence Forces' missions Other Don't know



Figure 57. Attitude towards the celebration of Veterans’ Day (%; N = all respondents)

27

34

34

30

32

26

41

39

37

39

36

16

20

23

20

6

7

5

7

6

5

2

2

3

3

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

certainly necessary rather necessary don't know rather unnecessary completely unnecessary



11 Information related to national defence

This chapter includes the results of two national defence information related questions: how necessary

is national defence instruction in schools and how many of the respondents have read the supplement

Riigikaitse of the daily Postimees.

11.1 National defence instruction in schools

The attitude towards national defence instruction in schools has been consistently positive among the

Estonian population—about four fifths of the respondents have found it certainly necessary or probably

necessary starting from the year 2008.

In autumn 2014, we made slight changes to the wording of the question which is now as follows:

“Should it be possible to get national defence instruction in all educational institutions

providing secondary education?”

The majority of the respondents continues to support national defence instructions in

shools—81 per cent of the respondents consider it certainly necessary or probably necessary (Figure

58). Estonian and Russian-speaking respondents’ support to national defence instruction differs by 10

per cent.

The support for national defence instruction is also predominant if we view specific age groups.

Figure 58. Attitude towards the necessity of national defence instruction in all educational

institutions providing secondary education (%; N = all respondents)

41

42

52

31

36

43

32

45

40

46

39

41

43

43

29

39

44

39

42

40

47

41

40

40

7

5

4

6

5

7

10

3

4

3

5

5

7

7

10

19

13

10

10

10

7

8

12

11

2

3

5

5

2

1

6

2

2

2

4

3

60 +

50 - 59

40 - 49

30 - 39

20 - 29

15 - 19

AGE (03/2016)

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03




11.2 Supplement Riigikaitse of the daily Postimees

In addition to the general mapping of the populations’ media consumption, the questionnaire included a

direct question regarding an information source related to national defence. Starting from November

2014, the question involves the readership of the supplement Riigikaitse of the daily Postimees.

16 per cent of the respondents had read the supplement Riigikaitse of the daily Postimees, 3

per cent of whom read it in most cases and 13 per cent read it once or a couple of times.

There has been no increase in the readership of Riigikaitse compared to the March survey.

As it is an Estonian-language edition, it was rather expected that there were more readers among the

Estonian respondents compared to the non-Estonians (23% and 4% respectively). Furthermore, there

are more readers among people with higher education (23%) and men (19%).

Figure 59. Reading the supplement Riigikaitse of the daily Postimees (%; N = all respondents)

3

4

7

2

3

1

5

3

6

5

3

11

15

16

13

9

3

18

11

12

13

13

84

79

73

84

87

93

76

84

81

79

81

2

2

4

2

1

3

1

2

1

3

3

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

female

male

GENDER (03/2016)

higher

secondary (vocational) education

primary or basic

EDUCATION (03/2016)

Other

Estonian

LANGUAGE (03/2016)

2014/11

2015/03

2015/10

2016/03

yes, mostly a few times no don't know



12 Media consumption

The questionnaire included a large section on media consumption with the main purpose of observing

the relationship between the population’s attitude on national defence and their contact with different

media channels. This task requires secondary data analysis, which is not the objective of the current

report.

The following presents the survey results describing the respondents’ engagement with different

television channels and radio stations as well as visits to internet portals in the form of simple

frequency distributions.

Figure 60. Visits to news portals and online newspapers

(%; N = all respondents)

33

37

24

16

18

11

22

26

12

15

19

6

5

1

14

13

12

15

12

13

10

15

17

11

16

18

11

5

1

14

20

17

26

17

18

14

18

17

21

19

20

17

10

6

18

34

34

35

55

51

65

45

40

56

50

43

66

80

92

54

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

delfi.ee; rus.delfi

ALL

Estonians

Other

uudised.err.ee; novosti.err.ee

ALL

Estonians

Other

postimees.ee; rus.postimees

ALL

Estonians

Other

other Estonian internet portals

ALL

Estonians

Other

Russian internet portals

ALL

eestikeelsed

venekeelsed

5-7 days per week 3-4 days 2 days or less not at all



Figure 61. Engagement with television channels and radio stations (%; N = all respondents)

50

69

10

10

5

20

42

60

6

40

56

5

8

4

16

21

5

56

19

4

52

44

59

10

14

2

38

12

15

7

8

4

18

14

19

5

15

20

4

6

2

13

8

4

17

9

5

19

12

14

6

6

1

17

12

9

16

20

19

23

13

13

11

14

15

11

12

9

18

12

12

12

14

15

13

9

9

9

7

4

13

26

7

67

62

72

39

31

8

78

31

9

80

74

85

53

59

79

15

58

76

16

35

18

75

73

93

32

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

ETV broadcast in Estonian

ALL

Estonians

Other

ETV broadcast in Russian

ALL

Estonians

Other

Kanal 2

ALL

Estonians

Other

TV3

ALL

Estonians

Other

3+

ALL

Estonians

Other

Pervõi Baltiiski Kanal

ALL

Estonians

Other

Russian TV-channels

ALL

Estonians

Other

Radio broadcast in Estonian

ALL

Estonians

Other

Estonian radio broadcast in Russian

ALL

Estonians

Other

5-7 days per week 3-4 days 2 days or less not at all



Figure 62. Reading newspapers—on the basis of last six issues (%; N = Estonian-speaking

respondents)

Figure 63. Reading newspapers—on the basis of last six issues (%; N = Russian-speaking

respondents)

4

10

10

15

18

22

3

4

6

8

6

9

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Äripäev

Eesti Päevaleht

Eesti Ekspress

Maaleht

Õhtuleht

Postimees

4-6 issues 1-3 issues

2

6

8

11

4

10

8

15

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Деловые Ведомости

День за Днем

Linnaleht

МК Эстония

4-6 issues 1-3 issues



ANNEXES

1 Questionnaire

2 Summary tables on responses

3 Frequency tables with the responses of Estonians

4 Frequency tables with the responses of non-Estonians

PUBLIC OPINION AND NATIONAL DEFENCE · Public opinion and national defence / March 2016 Ministry of...

Documents

Transcript of PUBLIC OPINION AND NATIONAL DEFENCE · Public opinion and national defence / March 2016 Ministry of...