NATO will use Riga Summit for first real training in the Baltic states: Latvian press digest


Latvia is ruled by a person checked up by the special services of several states. NATO will use the Riga Summit for the first real training in the Baltic states. In order to get back Abrene-Pytalovo, Latvia “should make its own nuclear bomb and threaten Russia with it.” Latvia paid off its debts to the Jewish community and refuses to admit responsibility for the Holocaust. In Latvia Russians have been “pushed out” into the third sector. The introduction of EURO put off again.

Latvia is ruled by a person checked up by the special services of several states.

Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga says that the suppositions that her name may be in the KGB files is a piece of misinformation Latvia’s ill-wishers have especially prepared for the NATO Riga Summit and is, apparently, quite a good a bait to jump at for National-Radicals, Russophobes, western “Latvians in exile” and the mass media. “Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga was an accomplice of ChK (the Emergency Committee of the Soviet Union) and she must be in their archives,” artist and dramatist, “Latvian in exile” Raimonds Strapans says in an interview to Rigas Laiks. On Nov 14 Neatkariga daily reported Strapans to say that his name may also be in the “ChK bags”: “I am certainly there. I have not checked up, but if you opened the bags, I would certainly be there – one way or another. Likewise, our president would also be there.”

To remind, in early November Vike-Freiberga sent back for revision – for the third time – the draft amendments to the law on the storage and use of KGB archives and documents proving some people’s cooperation with it. The amendments suggest making public all the available dossiers of former KGB agents. Vike-Freiberga says that by making public all the archives, Latvia will affect the interests of people who cooperated with the Soviet security agencies against organized crime, corruption and other misdeeds and who had nothing to do with KGB’s ideological activities, repressions against dissidents and fighters for Latvia’s independence. In the context of Strapans’ statements, the daily wonders: won’t this measure affect the interests of Vike-Freiberga herself?

However, in an interview to LETA the President’s spokesman has strongly denied Strapans’ suppositions. In his turn, on Nov 15 Strapans appeared in Diena daily with an open letter, where he says that he was misunderstood and explains: “I don’t know what the ChK wrote in its files and for what. If the files contain the names of the Latvians in exile who visited Latvia during the years of occupation, my family and I are certainly there. Vike-Freiberga is also there as, when in exile, we all met with artists, actors and poets of Latvia.” Strapans notes that he has never considered Vike-Freiberga as a Chk agent and has always believed that she is an outstanding figure in Latvia’s history.

However, Vike-Freiberga refuses to accept even a supposition that she may be in KGB files. In a Nov 15 interview to Latvijas Avize she says: “It is simply irresponsible and absurd to say that I or any other specific person can be in KGB files. In my case, it is even more absurd as before becoming President I had been checked up by the Latvian security agencies. Any presidential candidate is ‘blown through and weighed’: they check up if he is in the files or not, they look through his whole life, his past, his earnings, his character, his weak points — if he can be blackmailed. I was also checked up when becoming president, when Latvia was joining NATO and now, when I am hosting the summit (NATO — REGNUM) and am participating and partly directing some very secret talks. So, it is absurd to say that such a person has cooperated with the special services of other states.”

Vike-Freiberga says that she had been checked up long before she came back to Latvia: “When in Canada, I held offices requiring preliminary check-up by security services. I was checked up when I went abroad to represent Canada in a research program. Believe me, had I actually cooperated with the KGB I would not have been allowed to do it (of course, if the special services had known that — REGNUM). Later, when I was appointed the vice president of the Scientific Council, I needed a special access the documents of the Canadian Cabinet. That required even higher secrecy and, consequently, much deeper check-up. They checked me up for six months. Believe me if there is any person who has been ‘screened and blown through’ for several times by the special services of several states, it is your president. You can rest assured about that.”

Then Vike-Freiberga counter-attacks: “By the way, I am going to ask the security services — whom I regularly meet – how come that such absurd statements have appeared just a few weeks before the NATO Summit in Riga (Nov 28-29 — REGNUM). Some man said something in some interview and now the mass media is actively massaging his absurdities three times a day. (…) My conclusion is that some unfriendly forces systematically spread misinformation, while some of our forces collaborate with them.” In short, “some man” has cracked a bad joke, but what a strong effect his joke has made: the President is making far-reaching – almost KGB-style – conclusions.

“Believe me” she insists — as if somebody actually believes that the name of the president who has ruled a country for 8 years can really be in the archives checked and rechecked by special services. Vike-Freiberga says that the local special services have checked up everything. Meanwhile, when she sent the draft amendments back for the third time (Oct 25), some people in the 8th Saeima said that she might be personally interested in not making the archives public.

As REGNUMreported earlier, the well-known National Radical and Russophobe, independent member of the 8th Saeima Alexander Kirsteins – who would certainly not swallow the bait of “the unfriendly forces” – supposes that Vike-Freiberga may be concerned for her husband: “What we really want to know is: Who forced the Latvian intelligentsia, our writers and poets, to serve KGB at the time when it was already known that the Soviet Union was falling down? May be I am naïve but I think that they were interested in the activities of Vike-Freiberga’s husband in IMB. We know that they in the Soviet Union were eager to get IMB computer technologies. Many people have already unofficially confessed that the Committee for Cultural Relations bought them tickets so they could go to Canada and try to get information on IMB processors.” It seems that Kirsteins is actually naive; otherwise, the “special services of several states” who have repeatedly “checked up” the past and the present of the Freibergs family would not be worth a brass farthing.

NATO will use the Riga summit for the first real training in the Baltic states.

They in Latvia keep pointing out the international importance of the Riga NATO Summit for Latvia. Vike-Freiberga has even said that the Summit “will sweep away the last remains of the ‘iron curtain.’” However, all of them hush up the fact that the NATO Summit will be held in the city that has until recently hosted the Baltic Military District – the potential enemy of NATO. And instead of the “iron curtain,” there is some “unclear” state frontier and Latvia avoiding to sign a relevant agreement with Russia and openly claiming part of the Russian territory for almost a decade already. Meanwhile, Diena daily has learned that the forthcoming Riga Summit will be the first real exercise of the alliance on the field it has got as a result of its last expansion to the east.

“A whole bunch of heavyweight NATO politicians and military men will visit Riga on the days of the Summit – almost 2,000 people. Besides, for the first time NATO will have to plan security operations in the territory of Latvia,” says Diena, referring to some diplomatic sources. The daily notes that a total of 9,000 Latvian and foreign security men will ensure order in Riga, in the air and on the border and quotes the state secretary of the Latvian Defense Ministry Edgar Rinkevics as saying: “For the first time Latvia will host a real training of how to plan the reception and accommodation of NATO participant-states.” Rinkevics says that the air space will be guarded by US planes, the sea area by US and British ships, while German, Czech, Estonian and Lithuanian security men will protect the country from possible biological and nuclear terrorism. Meanwhile, some Latvian diplomat has told the daily that it is the first time NATO will protect this region. “They will get first-hand information about this territory,” says the diplomat.

In order to get back Abrene-Pytalovo, Latvia “should make a nuclear bomb and threaten Russia with it.”

Once again the Latvian authorities are going to ask lawyers for help in the problem of border agreement with Russia, Neatkariga reported on Nov 14. “In its declaration, the government (the new government — REGNUM) has expressed firm commitment to find ‘legally correct and political acceptable’ solution to the problem of border agreement between Latvia and Russia. Russian Ambassador to Latvia Viktor Kaluzhny is optimistic that the agreement can be signed as early as in the first months of 2007. However, the statements of some governmental coalition politicians show that the solution has not yet been found. In fact, the solution depends not so much on Russia’s sympathies as on the attitude of the new-comer Tēvzemei un Brīvībai/LNNK.”

The daily quotes one of the TB leaders, MP Maris Grinblats as saying: “They even said that it is necessary to form a commission of lawyers who would consult us on how to act so as to sign an agreement that would be acceptable to Russia and not contrary to our Constitution.” To remind, the agreement was not signed because of Latvia’s declaration explaining that the agreement is “contrary to the Constitution” in the point concerning “the territory of Abrene” – present-day Pytalovo, an area that was part of Latvia before 1940.

Concerning the position of the TB, Grinbalts says: “Here, the question is not only about a territory of 2,000 sq km. We say that we must not give Abrene to Russia, but admit that Russia has taken it away from us – and we have no hope that in the coming decades Russia will be ready to speak about it. However, Latvia must try to discuss this problem in the far future.” Neatkariga says that neither Grinblats nor other coalition representatives can specify how to legally solve this problem: “One politician has said that the best solution would be ‘to stop fooling around with the declaration’ and to sign the agreement in the form it is now – especially as Russia will also sign it in this form. However, our partners understand that the People’s Party (with its prime ministerial seat and parliamentary majority — REGNUM) will not agree to such a step as thereby they will admit that the agreement can as well be signed without the declaration they so eagerly supported.”

In its Nov 15 article Neatkariga continues: “If we look at this issue pragmatically and realistically, we will clearly see that Russia is not going to give Abrene back. So, the border is and will be the way it is now. In fact, Russia does not want to set a precedent as, if it gives Abrene to Latvia, it will consequently have to give something to Japan, Finland or any other states whose territories were taken by the Soviet Union. If we are so eager to get Abrene back, we should make our nuclear bomb and threaten Russia with it, but we should keep in mind that in such a case NATO tanks will not come to help us.”

The daily suggests a normal way to solve the border problem: “Latvia should recall its political declaration, and the Saeima should ratify the agreement. If some forces say that the agreement is contrary to the Constitution, the Government should organize a nationwide referendum, where the people will vote not for the agreement as such but for preserving or removing the constitutional point concerning Latvia’s territory.”

Presently, it seems that the Latvian politicians do not want to hold such a referendum. “Meanwhile, some political forces are already rubbing their hands in hope that such a referendum will be a free chance for them to advertise themselves – to rattle their national vertebrae and to yell in their shrill falsetto that they will not give a single inch of their native land. In fact, the present membership of Saeima would not be so hopeless for the signing of the agreement were it not for one problem:”

In terms of domestic policy, Kalvitis has got certain stability and predictable support of the parliamentary majority, but in terms of foreign policy, he has got potential big problems. (…) In the other ruling parties too there may be opponents to the agreement. If they form a majority and torpedo the agreement, this will mean that our politicians do not want to take this problem pragmatically but just wish to go on bickering with Russia. Of course, they can do it but they will face the music: the Belgians, the Dutch and the Portuguese will carry their goods in carts to Moscow before our very nose, while in our sprats, medicines, paints and commercial banks the Kremlin will always find “a high content of benzopyrene.” Concerning Kaluzhny’s optimism: quite recently — in a Nov 3 interview to Vesti Segodnya — Kaluzhny expressed his apprehensions that by their actions TV/LNNK may freeze Latvia’s relations with Russia and lead the border problem into a deadlock. And now just 10 days later he hopes that the agreement will be signed in the first months of 2007.

Latvia has paid off its debts to the Jewish community and refuses to admit responsibility for the Holocaust.

As REGNUM reported earlier, the Latvian Government has approved the bill for granting the local Jewish community 31,959,870 LVL (1.511bln RUR) and 14 facilities in the country (7 in Riga). “This is a way for Latvia to solve — once and for all — the all-European problem: to indemnify for the damage caused to the Jewish community by the Holocaust,” Diena daily reported on Nov 17, referring to comments by historians, government officials and Latvian-based Jews. Experts point out that the bill, to be considered by the Saeima shortly, is mutually beneficial: the Jewish community gets compensation, Latvia gets freedom from any further compensation claims. However, both the Prime Minister and the Jewish community say that this does not yet mean that Latvia has admitted its guilt for the Holocaust.

The daily quotes the head of the Jewish community of Latvia Arkady Sukharenko as saying: “This does not mean that Latvia has admitted its guilt for the Holocaust.” He says that the request for compensation covers 283 public and religious facilities and Holocaust victims. 32mln LVL is the cadastral value of the property as of Dec 2005. The 14 facilities to be given to the Jewish community are former synagogues and public facilities. Meanwhile, historian Aivars Stranga says that the Jewish community will get just a small part of the pre-war value of the property (hundreds of millions).

The headline of Diena’s article is “Support of the Jews Will Restore Justice.” On Nov 17 Latvian TV broadcast a vivid example of “how justice is being restored”: “The decision to grant property to the Jewish community has seriously threatened the future work of the Liepaja Pedagogical Academy, who will have to grant two of its three buildings to the Jewish community. The staff of the academy is in shock. They have decided to ask the Prime Minister to provide them with 30mln LVL for constructing new buildings. It should be noted that while the 32mln LVL for the Jewish community will be paid off in parts within 10 years, the new buildings will have to be built at once so that the academy can continue its work.”

In Latvia Russians have been “pushed out” into the third sector

In the last years Russians in Latvia have been actively cultivating the so-called third sector, i.e. they are forming NGOs. On Nov 13 the chairman of the board of the Russian Society of Latvia, psychologist Tatyana Favorskaya appeared in Telegraph daily with an article about this process. “From the first sector – state administration and self-government – Russians were expelled as far back as the early 90s through ‘reorganization’ and ‘language cleansing.’ This bastion (with guaranteed stable salaries and social benefits) is being strongly guarded from strangers – even if there are vacancies. In the second sector – entrepreneurship – Russians are mostly involved in small and, partly, medium-sized business. In the world big business is traditionally international but in Latvia it is not – Russians are far from being majority there, and this picture vividly shows that they in Latvia lie when they claim that the country’s private sector is in the hands of Russians.”

Fedorskaya notes that NGOs deal with the spheres that are non-profit and are, therefore, unattractive for business and are too small for being attractive for state structures, but by their projects and links with both the private sector and the authorities, NGOs structure the society, unite people with similar views and allow them to jointly express their citizenship. In Latvia there are just 8,000 NGOs — which is very little as compared with the countries of developed democracy – and Russians are still in minority there.

One more problem is representation: "The law says that NGOs can be member to ministerial and departmental advisory councils (109 in Latvia). They also have the right to be present at the Cabinet’s discussions of NGO-related problems, to hear the relevant conferences of the regional self-government committees and to offer them their solutions to the problems discussed. In 2005 the NGOs and the Cabinet signed a memorandum on cooperation, and almost 90 NGOs (among them several Russian-speaking NGOs) have joined it so far. There are very few Russians in advisory councils: of 109 advisory councils, they have representatives only in the advisory council of the Education Ministry. "

However, Fedorskaya is sure that “the future of the civil society in the Russian Diaspora depends on how actively they will cultivate the third sector: by increasing the number of Russian-speaking NGOs and enlarging their involvement in state administration and self-government, in the process of decision-making.”

Introduction of EURO put off again

They in the Bank of Latvia say that they will hardly be able to introduce EURO by 2010. On Nov 17 Hour daily reported: “The President of the Bank of Latvia Ilmar Rimesevics explains that they cannot introduce EURO because the growing gas and electricity prices will — directly or indirectly – raise inflation in Latvia. He says that it is the Government who is responsible for the introduction of EURO: it can do something to reduce inflation so that Latvia can meet the Maastricht criteria. On its part, the Bank of Latvia is ready to consult the Government on how to keep the prices from growing.” Hour reminds its readers that, at first, the Government decided to adopt EURO in 2008, but, later, Finance Minister Oskar Spurdzins (People’s Party) told LETA that the Government will fix a new date after drafting the country’s budget. Earlier, Prime Minister Aigars Kalvitis (People’s Party) said that the most real date for EURO introduction in Latvia is 2010.

link