Nikolay Mezhevich: Latvian Parliamentary Elections: Mythology and a Parallel with the Past

Nikolay Mezhevich, Ph.D. (Economics). Professor, School of International Relations, St. Petersburg State University.

 

Amidst a severe lack of Russian-language media coverage of the elections in Latvia, the web portal Delfi published an article with the headline: “Scandal? Putin’s Fan Wins Latvian Elections.” The Ukrainian Podrobnosti (“Details”) was not far behind - “Pro-Kremlin the National Harmony Party wins Parliamentary Elections in Latvia.” 

 

In comparison, reactions in Europe and the United States seem calm and rational. The BBC Russia website wrote: “Pro-Russian party wins most votes in election but without an absolute majority.” And note the response in The Washington Post: “Latvia’s center-right ruling coalition wins vote.”

 

And, as far as I see it, the majority of Russian media outlets have done little to make the situation any clearer. The state-run RT (formerly Russia Today) news channel reported thus: “Pro-Russia party leads in Latvian elections.”

 

In my opinion, a “pro-Russian” party is a union of likeminded individuals who put the interests of Russia above those of their own country. Describing the Harmony Party and the activities of its leader, Nils Ušakovs, is wrong both in terms of politics, and from a legal perspective. Harmony has clear centre-left, social-democratic leanings. Its foreign policy is guided by the desire to maintain pragmatic relations with Russia – relations that would allow the country to achieve both economic and political stability, and nothing more. (The party’s official name is Social Democratic Party “Harmony” SDP Saskaņa.)

 

ntv.ru

 

The party is full of businessmen who are involved in transit, transport, food and light industry. It sees pragmatic relations with Russia, rather than second-hand military equipment, as a guarantee of Latvia’s sovereignty. Let us emphasize that one more time: not friendly relations, not partner relations, but merely pragmatic relations.      

 

The current centre-right coalition diverges on its national economic program, a fact that most Latvians and Russians are unaware of.

 

Formal debates on issues of domestic policy are often fraught with internal conflicts that appear within the coalition itself. Foreign policy discussions are almost non-existent. The anti-Russia theme pervades. Trying to convince them that Russia poses no threat whatsoever to modern Latvia is harder than trying to convince a Catholic Bishop to reject the idea of the infallibility of the head of the Catholic Church.  

 

Given this, politicians and businessmen who simply want people to pay attention to the country’s difficult geo-economic situation and its multi-vector foreign policy need to have the courage of Nicolaus Copernicus and the willingness to sacrifice of Giordano Bruno.

 

 

It should be noted that, from a legal perspective, any party that works in the interests of a foreign state should be dissolved immediately and its leaders arrested on counts of treason. But this isn’t happening in Latvia, because the country’s political class is extremely narrow. The supposed pro-Russian leanings of the Harmony Party are the bread and butter of the country’s journalists, fed by the quite obvious political and economic interests of the majority.    

 

The ruling coalition, which includes the Unity Party, the Union of Greens and Farmers and the National Alliance “All for Latvia!” – “For Fatherland and Freedom/LNNK”, is virtually guaranteed to get the presidential mandate to form a new government. Latvia is a parliamentary republic and, as such, coalitions of parties that do not receive the majority of the votes are well within their rights to form governments.[1]

 

It’s difficult to argue with Latvian expert Jānis Ikstens, who commented in an interview for rus.DELFI.lv: “In previous elections, the [Harmony] party attracted voters who had become disillusioned with Latvian parties. But now voters see that Harmony cannot get a foothold in the government; it cannot influence decisions at the national level and can only work in Riga and a few other municipalities.” Mr. Ikstens is not entirely correct. Harmony is capable of working at the national level and lead the government, but the Latvian political system does not allow it de facto, although, of course, not de jure. Estonian centrists control Tallinn, while Harmony has a majority in Riga. Everybody is blocking their way to real politics on a national scale. 

 

themoscowtimes.com

 

Ignoring Harmony’s victory, however, moves us one step closer to a split between Russian-speakers and Latvians.

 

And it is difficult to turn a blind eye to the wishes of almost one quarter of the population – Russian-speaking non-citizens. Difficult, but possible…

 

It will amount to yet another tactical victory in the face of an obvious strategic loss and the destruction of the existing model of political organization. They have experience of this already. Over the past 15 years, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have seamlessly slipped back into the authoritarian regimes of the mid-1930s. The main argument has been stability. And it is the victory of stability that Latvia’s Ex-President Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga talked about when commenting on the election results. And it is this very same stability that will inevitably lead to a systemic crisis in the country. 

 

It is also significant that this was the lowest voting turnout in the country’s recent history. It’s not just because hundreds of thousands of voters live and work outside Latvia. It’s because people are sick of buying tickets to the same show over and over again, even if there are different actors playing the roles. 

 

So, it turns out that it was the American journalists who best summed up the situation in Latvia. The centre-right coalition really did win the election, and it will probably form the new government. Exactly what kind of coalition – and who will lead it – are mere details that have little to do with the economic and political life of the country. The Latvian political scene is unlikely to change – not until the scene itself changes, that is.