constructed identities: historical, complementary, conflictual

In 1995, Estonian politician and artist Jaak Olep told Postimees:
'The historical frontier of Estonia is not only an interstate border, but one part of the long boundary line running between the Western Christian and Eastern Orthodox civilisations' (Olep, PM, 5 January 2005).

A month later, the Electoral Union Better Estonia-Estonia Citizen noted:
'...Let us keep in mind how the Second World War broke out and how the Estonian Republic was annexed. Thereby, the present control line must be controlled and defended even more rigorously than state borders' (Parem Eesti-Eesti Kodanik, RH, 13 February 1995).

The same year, Estonian president Lennart Meri argued that '...Estonia has been part of the Roman-Germanic legal system for over 700 years... This legal basis... is a nursery where everything else springs up; it is the prerequisite, the basis and the very guarantor of the survival, the development and the sucess of our modern state.' (Meri, 1995b).

Here we can see three attempts to construct the Estonian post-Soviet identity: along the lines of the conflicting other (internal as well as external, as it is defined along lines of 'civilisations'), as a historical construction (Estonia as a victim to both East and West aggression), and along the lines of the complementary other (Europe as different, but still similar, in 'legal' ways). Although these identity sentiments have died down a bit in recent years, they still play into conflicts such as the (seemingly endless) discourse surrounding the Russian-Estonian border, attempts to integrate the Russian speaking community into Estonian society, and day to day debates over, for example, whether to remove the bronze soldier statue.

Speaking of the bronze soldier statue, I passed it this morning on my way to the Estonian National Library, where I am sitting right now, and is decorated quite elegantly with red carnations.