Donate NowKristina Rizga, for the Pulitzer Center (Photos by Akim Aginsky)
"Fire the Parliament! Fire the Parliament! Latvia! Latvia!" thousands of Latvians chanted on January 13, 2009. A roaring crowd dominated by young men moved toward the Parliament building in an attempt to take it over. Security forces wearing hard helmets and body shields moved in to thwart their advance. Enraged protesters threw rocks and bottles at the police. What started as a peaceful protest of 10,000 people turned into the worst riot Latvia has seen since re-gaining independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. Fifty people were injured and 100 arrested for overturning police cars and looting stores. As Latvia is experiencing one the sharpest economic downturns in Europe, protesters came out to oppose the widespread cuts in everything from employment to social services to hospital beds. Many Latvians feel that the government is squeezing the masses without imposing similar sacrifices on the political and financial elites.
Within one month, prime minister Ivars Godmanis dissolved his right-leaning government coalition and stepped down. The new prime minister, Valdis Dombrovkis, assembled another right-leaning cabinet that continued to pursue the same fiscal austerity policies that Latvians protested. In response, president Valdis Zatlers said he will consider dismissing the Parliament and holding early national parliament elections. By May, he changed his mind.
The municipal elections in Latvia this Saturday, June 6th, marked the first time Latvians had a chance to "fire" their elected officials through the ballot box, at least at the local level. For the first time since Latvia became the new front line in the global economic crisis, voters had a chance to transform the political landscape of Latvia from the bottom up.
The most dramatic change since the protests is the unprecedented voter support for the left-leaning party, the Harmony Center, in Latvia's capital city. Home to 700,000, Riga accounts for close to a third of all Latvia's population. It is the largest city in among all three of the Baltic states (incl. Estonia and Lithuania). For the first time since Latvia regained its independence 18 years ago, the most left-leaning, major party will hold the largest share of seats in Riga's City Council.
Founded in 2005, the Harmony Center is a coalition of four parties representing primarily Russian-speaking minorities and a small share of moderate ethnic Latvians. The Harmony Center ran on a center-left platform advocating for an increased state involvement in major economic decisions, more safety nets for economically vulnerable populations, and increased investments in education, healthcare and local business development, among other demands.
The party owes its success in large part to its charismatic leader — and leading candidate for the mayor's seat — Nil Ushakov. (Picture above.) The 32-year-old Ushakov is an ethnic Russian, who is fluent in five languages and studied economics in Denmark. Since 1998, Ushakov worked as a journalist in print and television. His media savvy gives him a significant advantage over other leading candidates for the mayor's seat. Ushakov also ran a much more grassroots-oriented campaign than his opponents that focused more on community gatherings rather than media advertising.
The Harmony Center garnered 34 percent of the total vote. This will most likely translate into 26 of 60 seats in the City Council. The Mayor will be elected by the new City Council delegates in the coming days.
Electoral gains by the second strongest party, the centrist Civic Union party, were reported as a surprise in Latvian media. Founded last year by former members of more conservative parties, the Civic Union gained 18 percent of the vote. At present, the party holds two seats in the City Council. With this election, that number will most likely jump to 14. Local political observers attributed this rise to ethnic Latvians' opposition to The People's Party the current governing party in the national parliament. One of Latvia's oldest right-leaning parties, its name is associated with corruption and government waste more than almost any other. The People's Party suffered the biggest losses in the June 6th elections across the country.
The center-right coalition of Latvia's Way and Latvia's First Party came in third. It's gains were more modest considering that its leader Ainars Slesers was the front-runner in the Mayoral campaign. His most famous phrase, Gazi Grida, ("pedal to the metal") is symbolic of his neoliberal leanings and is often referred to by locals as the major cause for Latvia's unprecedented economic bubble, and now, its rapid nosedive. At the same time, Slesers was able to attract large foreign investments to Latvia and as an experienced, successful business entrepreneur. Many Latvians believe he is more qualified to run Riga than Ushakov, who only worked as a journalist, though Slesers is a millionaire who is dogged by frequent accusations of corruption.
In the rest of Latvia, the political landscape didn't change as dramatically as in Riga. The centrist Civic Union and the center-left Harmony Center gained more local seats in many regions of the country, while the most right leaning parties, such as the People's Party and Fatherland and Freedom, lost significant ground. Some of it can be attributed to the fact that the largest numbers of left-leaning voters are concentrated in Riga. Those are ethnic Russians, as well as individuals of mixed ethnicities and urban Latvians, who tend to be less conservative than rural Latvians.
Less Nationalism and Neoliberalism
History hangs especially heavy in Latvia, and the scars of Soviet occupation define Latvia's left-right political divide. When the Soviet Union occupied Latvia in 1940, it began massive deportations of Latvians. Close to 200,000 Latvians were imprisoned or deported to Soviet Gulags. Over 130,000 Latvians fled abroad. The use of Latvian language was banned in all public spheres, and an influx of laborers and military personnel from Russia and other Soviet republics resulted in a dramatic drop of ethnic Latvians from 75% of the population in 1935 to 52% in 1989. In Riga today, only 42% are ethnic Latvians. Russian-speaking residents -- Russians, Belorussians, Ukrainians, and other ethnicities -- make up about 58%. These ethnicities tend to connect with Russian or Soviet culture more than Latvian. This often makes ethnic Latvians feel like a minority in their country.
This reality combined with the fear of another potential occupation by Russia has dominated Latvian politics since it regained its independence in 1991. In a country where only 60 percent of the population is ethnically Latvian, that meant that political decisions were dominated by nationalist issues.
Because of this historic legacy and the fact that the center-left Harmony Center's membership is primarily Russian-speaking, its rise to power is significant. The First Baltic Television Channel reported that 10 percent of Latvians planned to vote for the Harmony Center. The young men that were arrested in the violent riots of January 13 were both Russian and Latvian. These facts may signal a new era for political parties in Latvia -- one where socioeconomic issues are on par with the politics of ethnic identity. More significantly, that could mean that the scars of the Soviet occupation may be slowly healing, at least among the urban Latvians.
In addition to a heavy emphasis on Nationalism, the platforms of the governing parties were also significantly influenced by neoliberalism. Post-communist Latvia emerged at a time when neoliberalism enjoyed broad support across the world. Eastern European countries often associated democracy with unrestrained markets. As a result, for the past 18 years, Latvia's leaders modeled economic development on neoliberal ideas. This appealed to Latvians because it implied the right to unrestrained consumption and accumulation of wealth that was banned during the Soviet Union.
It now appears that the global recession is moving the political center of Latvian parties leftward. It remains to be seen whether campaign promises will impact government policies in tangible ways. But the campaign rhetoric of the successful parties, from both sides of the political spectrum, reflects an understanding that times are changing. Nationalist and neoliberal themes were downplayed while the role of the state to create a more sustainable economy gained currency. For the left-leaning parties that meant investing more in individuals through education, healthcare and social services, as well as support for local businesses. And for the more centrist parties, the emphasis was on reducing waste in government, attracting foreign investment and creating jobs.
You can contact Kristina Rizga at [email protected]