Immutable ownership records.
- Tweets 9,331
- Following 558
- Followers 135
- Likes 3,189
Priit Porila retweeted
NATO’s core purpose since its founding — and especially after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine — has been deterrence of large-scale conventional aggression against its members.
That deterrent has so far held:
no NATO territory has faced the kind of open invasion Ukraine has endured.
At the same time, the character of fighting has clearly evolved.
Former Estonian Defence Forces commander Gen. Martin Herem summed it up well after the war’s lessons became clear:
the changes have introduced different technical solutions to warfare, but they have not changed the nature of warfare itself, including its logistical issues.
Drones dominate the discussion and the attrition battle for good reason — they are numerous, relatively cheap, and highly effective at observation, denial and striking. Yet as Herem put it: “To finally control something, you need a Martin from Järvakandi with a rifle or any Jussi from Põltsamaa with boots on the ground.”
Technology can make taking and holding territory far more costly and slower, but it does not remove the requirement for infantry to clear, occupy and control ground. news.err.ee/1610088115/forme…
1
54
The social-media exchange between hawkish Isamaa historian Lauri Vahtre and low-polling Interior Minister Igor Taro, followed by a handful of news write-ups, is classic political theater:
symbolic, low-stakes posturing that generates headlines without forcing any immediate decisions.
Tallinn's Nevsky Cathedral may be sold, demolished or made into a museum
#estonia
news.err.ee/1610088106/talli…
103
Paistab, et Rannarootsi vorstireklaamiga peab nüüd Erakondade Rahastamise Järelevalve Komisjon tegelema hakkama.
Tegemist on peidetud erakonnareklaamiga või vähemalt tasuta valimiskampaaniaga.
facebook.com/MihhailKolvart/…
1
5
1,154
Priit Porila retweeted
An interesting contradiction is that many components of Ukrainian drones are "Made in China."
Ratcliff says that emerging technologies and China are CIA's top priorities.
youtube.com/shorts/CaF-9HRiK…
1
1
1
4,362
Priit Porila retweeted
Your framing is quite one-sided and sensationalized.
China didn’t “walk away” from negotiations it was never rushing to conclude on Russia’s preferred terms.
The project remains stalled on price and commercial conditions, as it has been for years.
x.com/i/grok/share/f7a44e8c4…
6
9
93
19,900
Priit Porila retweeted
Wars are won on the battlefield. You can lose a war at the negotiating table after the war, even if you won on the battlefield, but you can’t win at the peace table if you’ve lost on the battlefield.
~ Stephen Kotkin
youtu.be/Wdo5VRuZd5k?si=qje_…
3
6
41
15,172
2025 clip, 2026 outrage.
1.3 million Estonians vs 1.4 billion Chinese — Kaja Kallas remix.
Same Hudson Institute take, freshly ‘discovered’ again.
Anti-hawk greatest hits tour keeps spinnin ♻️
“If Europe cannot defeat Russia, how can we defeat China?”
— Kaja Kallas, the Chief Diplomat of EU.
🤡 for WW3
358
Russia knows it would lose any straight conventional war against NATO.
— General Michael Claesson
Supreme Commander of the Swedish Armed Forces
Chief of Defence
Claesson isn’t warning “Russia strikes this month” — he’s saying the risk window for a limited test of NATO cohesion is already open right now and will stay open for years.
Planners can’t park the threat in a comfy 1–5‑year future while the West is still rearming.
That test could be hybrid – sabotage, shadow‑fleet brinkmanship, information ops – or a small kinetic probe like a strike on a Baltic island, aimed at seeing whether allies actually act when one is hit, not at winning a full‑scale war.
In a longer School of War interview he spends considerable time on Russian weaknesses:
a strained economy, extreme dependence on vulnerable Baltic shipping and energy exports, and the plain fact that Moscow knows it would lose any straight conventional war against NATO.
Cherry-picking only the “could test NATO soon” lines while ignoring that vulnerability analysis turns a balanced deterrence argument into a caricature of alarmism.
youtu.be/fiv4_ZQQ7UI?si=QuFQ…
2
1,273
Finnish Foreign Minister @elinavaltonen posted May 8, 2026:
“Ukraine belongs in NATO. It is not only in the interest of the Ukrainian people, but also in the European self-interest, to include the most capable army in Europe in the securing of peace and freedom.”
Strong on the “should” and the “interest.”
Zero on the how.
This is precisely why the real question remains:
if full NATO membership is politically blocked for the foreseeable future, what second-best security architecture do we actually build to manage a heavily armed, EU-bound but non-NATO Ukraine over the next 10–15 years?
That’s the uncomfortable work my article is trying to push forward.
x.com/elinavaltonen/status/2…
ALT Photo: Janne Aaltonen / @iltasanomat
Die Ukraine gehört in die NATO. Es liegt nicht nur im Interesse des ukrainischen Volkes, sondern auch im europäischen Eigeninteresse, die leistungsfähigste Armee Europas in die Sicherung von Frieden und Freiheit einzubeziehen. Vielen Dank an das ZDF für das Interview.
1
199
Priit Porila retweeted
European University Institute’s 50th Anniversary
Speech by António Costa, President of the European Council and interview with Henry Foy, Financial Times
May 7, 2026
We cannot change the geography we are in Europe we are neighbors of Russia and of course we need to talk with them about the future of the security architecture of of Europe.
youtube.com/watch?v=rSjvg20H…
1
1
142
Priit Porila retweeted
Venemaaga läbirääkimiste teema on Eestis stigmatiseeritud ning taandatud VM ja presidendi vaheliseks mõõduvõtmiseks.
Zelenskyy on juba valinud läbirääkimiste vahendajaks Türgi. EU ei tea, kuidas ka ree peale saada.
The EU’s policy is to oppose discussions or decisions about Ukraine without Kyiv’s involvement. But many leaders fear that peace talks between the US, Russia and Ukraine to end the more than four-year-long war have made little progress. ft.trib.al/eoMSGHa
1
89
Poor Glenn of @USN_info is worried.
I'm sure Estonia 'authorized' their airspace for these 1500+ km strikes. Just in case. Because obviously nobody has topographic maps or satellite navigation these days. Of course it's not ridiculous at all.
@NorwayMFA
215
Priit Porila retweeted
First Zelenskyy helps Moscow by musing on propaganda TV that “one of the Baltics isn’t ready for strong resistance” and maybe not all NATO states would want to defend us. Now Tusk helps by musing that the US might not be “loyal” to Europe’s defence and that a Russian attack could come “within months”.
Motives are different — Kyiv wants more aid, Warsaw wants EU defence and to hedge against Trump — but the information‑war gift is identical:
public doubts about Article 5, visible allied anxiety and perfect quotes from highly credible voices that plug straight into Kremlin narratives about a divided, unreliable NATO.
From Estonia, this isn’t about denying the Russian threat. It’s about watching partners casually spend down the credibility of the very guarantees we actually live under, for their own pressure campaigns, while we all pay the deterrence price on the front line.
@Tsahkna @markomihkelson
@AlarKaris @PRB_Raimond @RihoTerras
x.com/i/status/2046865388227…
Does Zelenskyy understand the information-war dynamics?
Zelenskyy is exactly the kind of credible voice Russia could never manufacture on its own. As president of a country actually fighting Russia, his speculation carries real weight — especially when paired with the visible reality of the Ukraine war.
It hands Moscow ready-made alignment on their favorite narratives:
• Amplifies the “NATO is divided” narrative
• Creates visible allied discord
• Supports the “hysterical for aid” framing
• Projects Russian strength and strategic initiative
• Solves the Kremlin’s “resonance problem”
This is precisely the danger the 2023 Air University study warned about:
Russian propaganda only works when it aligns with visible events and credible voices.
airuniversity.af.edu/Wild-Bl…
1
1
1,240
1/
Аргумент «для проверки НАТО достаточно перейти речку и захватить Нарву, и никто не ответит, потому что все боятся ядерной эскалации» звучит эффектно, но разваливается, как только смотреть на реальные оценки и механизмы сдерживания.
#Estonia #NATO
крупномасштабного вторжения и не нужно. достаточно перейти речку и захватить Нарву, чтобы проверить НАТО на ответные действия. которых, я уверен, не будет. никто не станет эскалировать с ядерной державой, этого все боятся.
1
1
466
12/
Поэтому профессиональные оценки выглядят так:
– да, угроза в будущем возможна;
– да, Москва может искать «окно возможностей»;
– но «перейти речку и захватить Нарву, а НАТО струсит» — это не анализ, а фантазия, игнорирующая и реальное состояние ВС РФ, и логику сдерживания, и публичные обязательства самого НАТО
1
156
13/
Можно считать, что НАТО переоценено, можно критиковать европейскую политическую волю — это отдельный разговор. Но сводить всё к картинке «пара батальонов тихо берёт город, а Запад испуганно молчит» — значит подменять сложную и опасную реальность удобным мифом.
news.err.ee/1609996285/prime…
1
1
141