The so-called Saatse Boot – a 15-hectare stretch of Russian territory that extends into Estonia and is crossed by a road that is important to the local population – came into the spotlight in October after unusual Russian activity was noticed there, writes ERR News.
The use of the approximately kilometre-long road crossing the Saatse Boot was officially approved in 2003. The agreement allows Estonians to cross Russian territory, but this can only be done by vehicle and without stopping; pedestrians are not allowed. To get to Saatse in another way, it’s necessary to use dirt roads, which lengthens the distance.
On the 10th of October, Estonian border guards spotted armed Russian soldiers without identification marks on the road and closed the road to prevent possible provocations. Entering Russian territory means entering its jurisdiction, and Russian border guards have the right to stop vehicles if they deem it necessary.
The border treaty between Estonia and Russia has either remained unratified for years, or has been close to being concluded, but the process has been interrupted for various reasons. If the border treaty had been concluded, the territory of the Saatse Boot would belong to Estonia.
Janek Mägi, head of the Border Guard and Migration Department of the Estonian Ministry of the Interior, explained that
preparations for the border treaty began as early as the 1990s,
and it was known that the Saatse Boot would come under Estonian administration, and both Estonians and Russians agreed to this: “So, there wasn’t really a sharp dispute there and that also answers the question of why the bypass road hasn’t been built earlier.”
In 2013, Postimees reported that the still-unratified treaty stipulated that Estonia and Russia would exchange an area of 128.6 hectares.
Following the events of the 10th of October, the government has pledged to accelerate the construction of the bypass. It was planned that it could be ready by the end of 2026, but the need to conduct an environmental impact assessment has stopped the planned work. On the 13th of October, the Minister of Infrastructure Kuldar Leis announced that the government would make changes to the legislation that would allow for the assessment to be waived and design work to begin.
The Estonian and Russian delegations first agreed on the text of the border agreement in October 1996. In March 1999, the heads of delegations initialed the technically completed drafts of the agreement and its annexes. Since then, Estonian governments have regularly confirmed their readiness to sign border agreements.
In 2005, both sides agreed to the text of the agreement.
Marko Mihkelson, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Estonian Parliament, pointed to a possible reason for Russia’s change of position – Estonia’s accession to NATO and the European Union in 2004.
The border treaty, which demarcates land and sea borders, was signed in May 2005 by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and then Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet. During the ratification, the Estonian Parliament also decided to include a preamble that referred to the 1920 Treaty of Tartu. This led Russia to cancel its signature and refuse to ratify the treaty. Moscow justified this by possible territorial claims on the part of Estonia. According to the Treaty of Tartu, Estonia’s territory could be slightly larger.
A new border treaty was signed in February 2014, and it included an explanation that neither side made territorial claims, and the treaty only concerned the border. After Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea, the issue has become very sensitive again and has not moved forward. After February 2022, when Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, diplomatic relations with Moscow have broken down, and the border treaty has fallen into oblivion.
Not all members of parliament agreed to include the preamble in the treaty in 2005,
but no one believes that this is a reason not to ratify the border treaty. Mikhelson, who supported the inclusion of the preamble in the treaty, said that nothing prevented Russia from ratifying the treaty, which was signed by the foreign ministers of both countries. “Estonia had shown readiness to proceed with ratification. So, I maintain that blaming Estonia in this context is entirely unfounded, because we have no information suggesting things would have gone differently if that sentence hadn’t been added to the ratification law,” Mikhelson said.
The politician pointed out that the view that there is no border treaty is the result of the 2005 decisions, more in line with the Russian narrative than with Estonia’s interests. “It would be more accurate to say that Russia has never shown a desire to bring the border treaty with Estonia into force. That’s the real truth,” Mikhelson argues.
Social Democrat Sven Mikser has a similar view: “But ultimately, the responsibility for the treaties not being ratified bilaterally lies with Russia.” He added that ratifying the treaty would not have prevented the current Russian provocations, its aggression against Ukraine and the subsequent events. “I’m definitely not willing to point fingers and say that any domestic Estonian political intrigue, calculation or maneuver is to blame for Russia carrying out provocations in the Saatse Boot today.”
Mikhelson pointed out that there is no indication that Russia would like to ratify the border treaty in the foreseeable future: “I believe Russia’s interest is to act far more aggressively, as we’ve seen in the case of Ukraine.” Mikser also emphasized Russia’s aggressive behavior and noted that Estonia could not have done anything to prevent it. He said that today’s situation is caused by Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, and the increase in tension in the aggressor’s relations with NATO and Europe, and Moscow is provoking not only its immediate neighbors, and nothing done or not done in the past could change that.
Read also: Estonian government may scrap the bureaucracy to speed up construction of Saatse Boot bypass