“You should heed your partners’ advice but do it your own way”

Latvian Saeima member Veiko Spolitis, who attended, as an observer, the 2014 Ukraine presidential elections in Odesa and mingled with people on Khreshchatyk, when it was strewn with protesters’ tents, visited Kyiv the other day. As we interviewed the Latvian MP on March 29, and Latvia became a NATO member on that day 12 years ago, the question that emerged was, naturally: “To what extent was that event important to your country?”

“WE SET OURSELVES A GOAL TO ALLOT 2 PERCENT OF GDP FOR DEFENSE BY 2018”

“It was very important for our country to join NATO. Although we had signed an EU Association Agreement by 1995, society believed that security was the main thing. As only NATO could provide this, joining the Alliance became our No.1 goal. Besides, we had a little different situation compared to Estonia and Lithuania because in 1991, when we regained our independence, ethnic Latvians accounted for 56 percent of the population. The NATO accession-related reforms helped our country very much. So we set ourselves a goal to allot 2 percent of GDP for defense by 2018. We will also continue to carry out the reforms that strengthen our defense.”

We know that your country is building a fence on the border with Russia. What is the attitude of society to this?

“It’s a very good question. Latvian social websites comment that a 2.5-meter-high fence topped with barbed wire is no obstacle to a tank. Our border guards are saying this wall will not ensure security against a hypothetical Russian attack, but it will show where the border is and where the source illegal human trafficking is. We could not have put up this wall before because the treaty on the Latvia-Russia border was signed as late as last year, after which we finished carrying out demarcation on land. We have built the first three kilometers now and are planning to build 30 km by the end of this year and 90 km by late 2017.”

“IT IS PEOPLE, NOT ARMS, THAT WIN IN WARS”

Is NATO doing enough to ensure the security of your country and the Baltic region as a whole and deter Russia from attacking?

“I think it is the people who want to defend their freedom and morals, rather than arms, that win in wars. In my opinion, NATO missed Russia’s war against Georgia. Ukraine has paid dearly for the Russian aggression. This forced the Alliance at last to do its own business, i.e., provide collective security for and defense of its members. Back in 2004, we decided not to spend money for our own air force. It is the NATO air force that patrols the Baltic countries’ air space. Yet there still remains a threat from Russian Iskander missile systems deployed in Kaliningrad, Crimea, and Syria. NATO is aware of and tackling this problem. But, in spite of all this, we must see to it that the majority of Latvian society should be aware of a potential aggression from the East.”

“WE MUST MAKE IT CLEAR TO PUTIN THAT THERE CAN BE NO RETURN TO PREVIOUS POLICIES”

When sanctions were being imposed against Russia first for the annexation of Crimea and then for aggression in eastern Ukraine, it was supposed that this would force Putin to change his attitude to Ukraine. Do you think these sanctions will affect the Russian leader’s behavior?

“Sanctions will not change Putin, but they can have an impact on his inner circle and Russian big business. As we can see, they are already having an impact, but we don’t know when they will produce a result. In addition to sanctions, what also influences the Russian economy is oil prices and worldwide commitment to the rule of law. If Russia behaves like an outcast, it will be shooting into its own foot. Sanctions must remain because they are symbolic and aimed against corrupt officials. The question is how long Russian society will wait for something to change in Russia. We must make clear to Putin that there can be no return to previous policies.”

“PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA”

Russian propaganda is very strong, and even a term has come up – “information as a weapon.” In what way is your country addressing this problem?

“Indeed, this is a very acute problem for the populace that does not speak the Latvian language. We can see the continuation of Soviet-era attitudes. It makes no difference whether you call the organization KGB or FSB – it employs the same methods and the same ‘comrades.’ Of course, the propaganda problem does exist, and I think the free press is the best instrument to tackle it.

“I think the main thing is to earmark more money for public television and to set up TV channels that broadcast in Russian. On the other hand, people are increasingly tired of the propaganda that makes them nervous. I can see that, like in the Soviet era, people are tired of Russian propaganda and can understand what is what.”

“REFERENDUM IS A PRIZE FOR DEMAGOGUES”

What do you think of the Netherlands referendum on the Ukraine-EU Association Agreement?

“Some people believe that a referendum is an expression of popular will. I am a democrat by nature, but I do not think a referendum is the best way to express popular will. I prefer representative democracy. There is a German expression that emerged in the 1930s and can be translated as ‘referendum is a prize for demagogues.’ By means of a referendum, Hitler came to power and annexed Austria.

“As for the referendum in Crimea, which was held with participation of an occupational army, it is the giddy limit. Latvia has seen a lot of referendums in the past 25 years. Sometimes people do not even read the referendum’s question – they think they must judge the government. Therefore, referendum is not the best way to make decisions.

“As for the Dutch referendum, I think it is possible that there will be no quorum or people will approve this agreement. I think that, unlike the Greeks, Italians, or the French, who live very far from Russia and did not suffer from the MH17 air crash in the Donbas, the Dutch can tell black from white and bad from good.”

“THE UKRAINIANS MUST WAKE UP AND PUT MORE PRESSURE ON THE TOP CIRCLES”

What experience of your country can come in handy in reforming Ukraine?

“You should heed your partners’ advice but do it your own way for the benefit of Ukraine. Looking at and comparing what we have passed and what has been going on in Ukraine since the 2014 Maidan, I have seen that there are very many common things in our societies. People want immediate changes. People thought, of course, after the Maidan events: we have toppled the corrupt Yanukovych and it will be better immediately. I can remember, as if it were today, the Baltic chain in 1989: almost 2 million Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians joined their hands to remind us that Stalin and Hitler had partitioned Europe on August 23, 1939. And our media spread the slogan ‘Better in bast shoes but in a free Latvia.’ People said they were prepared, but many economists from our diaspora in Canada were saying it would be difficult. Of course, patriotically-minded people had no doubts at all. But many people lost their jobs because they had a Soviet education. I can see the same going on here.

“I would only say that the Ukrainians must wake up, put more pressure on the top circles, and form civic parties. Otherwise, everything will be repeated. One may think: what can I do if they are all corrupt? But who will do this job for you? For it is the principle of democracy: if you don’t like something, do it your own way. This is the only piece of advice.”

“WE DID NOT NEED TO INVITE FOREIGNERS”

Did you ever have foreigners appointed to ministerial offices?

“In the early 1990s, we received many people from our US and Canada diaspora via the Popular Front. Repatriates from Canada, the US, Australia, and Germany accounted for almost a third of parliament members of the two first convocations. It is they who pressed for indispensable changes and reforms which Ukraine needs now. We did not need to invite foreigners. Our former president was a refugee who had run away from the Soviet and Nazi occupation to Morocco and then to Canada. Besides, only two diaspora persons held ministerial offices, but it was before 1996 and then things changes.”

In other words, foreigners should not be invited as ministers – perhaps only as advisors?

“You are right because advisors will go, while Ukraine will stay behind for the Ukrainians. And the Ukrainians must build a state of their own for their children.”