Keeping Princeton in Estonia: A Defense of Educational Exchange

By Astor Lu and William Aepli
April 18, 2025

In response to recent calls to end Princeton University's Russian language program in Estonia, two students argue for the program's continuing relevance and value. The debate centers around an opinion piece authored by Veronika Kitsul, who advocates for the discontinuation of the program while asserting that it undermines Estonia’s cultural identity. However, as participants in the program, we believe it is essential to counter these claims and highlight the significant educational benefits that come from Princeton's partnership with Tallinn University.

The Value of Exposure

Astor Lu and William Aepli, members of the first cohort in Princeton's Russian Summer Program in Tallinn, feel that firsthand experience outweighs abstract arguments about national identities. In her piece, Kitsul asserts that engaging with the Russian language in Estonia detracts from celebrating Estonian culture. However, we contend that learning Russian gives American students valuable insights into Estonia’s rich and complex history. Many Americans, lacking familiarity with Eastern Europe, can misplace Estonia's identity without direct exposure to its culture.

During our time in Tallinn, we observed the distinct differences between Estonia and its historical neighbor. Although we entered the country aware of its independence, our experience in the program allowed us to deeply appreciate the nuances of its culture. The programming included language instruction as well as activities such as Estonian movie nights and food workshops, which fostered cultural appreciation far beyond what classroom instruction could offer.

Collaboration Over Control

Contrary to Kitsul's assertion that Princeton controls the program, it is, in fact, a collaborative effort with Tallinn University. This joint initiative emphasizes mutual benefits, allowing students to explore both Estonian and Baltic cultures, ultimately enriching their understanding of the region. The proposed activities, such as excursions to Tartu, Estonia and Riga, Latvia, are designed to enhance cultural exposure and engagement, providing an invaluable context for language learning.

Personal experiences during the program illustrated this cultural blending, from attending concerts featuring local artists to socializing with Estonian peers. Such interactions showcase how understanding the historical context of Russian presence in Estonia is pivotal for gaining a holistic view of the nation and its identity.

Complexity of Identity

Kitsul's position assumes a monolithic view of Estonian culture, failing to recognize that Estonia has navigated a complex history shaped by various influences. The country has a diverse demographic, with nearly half of Tallinn’s residents speaking Russian as their mother tongue. Removing the Russian context from discussions about Estonian identity would not only simplify the conversation but also disregard the realities faced by many locals.

We argue that the incorporation of Russian language study does not dilute Estonian culture but rather reflects the intertwining histories and identities that characterize the region. Students exploring these layers of identity through language and cultural exchange play a role in building understanding and mitigating tension between nations.

Future of Language Programs

The students advocate for the continuation of Princeton's Russian program in Estonia, asserting its importance in the broader context of U.S. foreign relations and education. The U.S. Department of State categorizes Russian as a critical language, underscoring the importance of having individuals equipped with the skills to engage diplomatically in a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape.

While we recognize the appeal of diversifying language offerings to include instruction in Estonian and other Baltic languages, the current enrollment numbers indicate a significant interest in Russian. As noted, other less common languages in Princeton's curriculum struggle with minimal enrollment. Thus, the partnership with Estonia serves as a strategic conduit for students to develop an appreciation and understanding of Baltic culture while also gaining proficiency in a language of geopolitical significance.

Conclusion

Kitsul's call to dismantle the program could inadvertently limit access to important cultural education and language acquisition. We believe that the benefits of the Russian Summer Program in Estonia reaffirm its legitimacy and necessity, providing students with crucial experiences that extend beyond language learning.

In light of these arguments, we strongly advocate for maintaining Princeton's presence in Estonia as a means of fostering greater cultural understanding and learning opportunities. The unique opportunities provided by this program enhance students' educational journeys and contribute to a deeper appreciation of a region that holds significance on the global stage. Keeping Princeton in Estonia cannot only enrich individual learning experiences but could also aid in building a more informed and peaceful future.