Punishment for courage

Latvia’s political elite is divided on the outcome of last Thursday’s presidential elections when the incumbent President Valdis Zatler lost to the former banker, Andris Berzins, in the second round.

Ex-President Vaira Vike-Freiberga (1999-2007) believes the incumbent President, Valdis Zatler, wanted to launch a new era when he decided to disband the Sejm [Parliament] , so as to put an end to the 20-year-old influence of the oligarchs on politics. Now her country [she says] has taken a couple of steps backward in terms of political dependence upon the oligarchs. She declined comment on the way President Berzins had been elected. When asked whether she thought he got his presidency owing to the oligarchs, she replied, “I have made no such statements. Let the media people voice their opinion.”

Prime Minister Valdis Dombrovskis (New Era Party since 2002) notes that Zatlers failed to get the Sejm’s majority simply because most of the Latvian MPs had overlooked Latvia’s need for a political course free of oligarchic influence. He believes that Zatlers was punished for his courage.

Ventspils Mayor Aivars Lembergs says President Valdis Zatlers will be remembered as one of those who “set Rome on fire,” stressing that the new president is a good manager/administrator, that he lacks PR experience and will have to gain it.

President Andris Berzins hopes his efforts will be judged by society for what they are worth. He said the polls were in his favor and promised interviews also in Russian, stressing that he would answer questions in Russian under “official circumstances” and that “vis-a-vis I would choose the language that would help achieve the best result.” The new president promises not to yield to oligarchic pressure. http://www.delfi.lv/ quotes him as saying: “Those who think that I will let an oligarch to have me on a leash should better think twice.”

The Day asked Dr. Daunis AUERS, a political analyst, for comment on the presidential election and its consequences.

How would you explain Zatlers’ defeat, considering that many people supported his intention of disbanding parliament to rid your country of corruption?

“Part of the political elite decided to vote down Zatlers because he had become too independent. Four years ago they voted for him because he seemed a weak and ineffective candidate.

As it was, it took Zatlers several years to change this image. Starting with the economic crisis in 2008, he was getting to look more and more like a statesman determined to combat corruption and ensure political stability and accountability. The general public liked this antipolitical stance.”

What about his predecessor, Mrs. Vaira Vike-Freiberga, and her statement that this presidential election was a step backward? Doesn’t Zatlers’ defeat mean an end to the struggle against corruption, and that his decision to hold a referendum will have no effect?

“The referendum will be held as scheduled and it’s unlikely that there will be any changes to the struggle against corruption, considering that the new president exerts no direct influence on the Anticorruption Bureau.”

Is this bureau really effective?

“Yes, it is. The disbanded parliament, after it had forbidden to search the residence of the Latvian oligarch, Ainars Schlesser. True, the bureau’s director isn’t tough enough, but he has two tough deputies who are resolved to combat corruption and are struggling for power.”

What about the consequences of the election of the former banker, Berzins, as president in terms of Latvian future and foreign policy? Won’t this policy become even more Russia-oriented?

“Hard to say, considering that Berzins has made no statements on foreign policy. Rather, he has said on more than one occasion that he was sick and tired of politics.”

We know that he has stated, after being elected, that he would improve relations with Russia and that Russian would be used to find more effective solutions to some problems, and that Latvia would take part in Russian projects.

“That’s right. After his election Berzins declared he would improve relations with Russia (precisely what any newly elected head of state or prime minister would have said, and then done little in that respect), and that he would speak in Russian on the Russian-language channels. This is cause for concern for only a couple of small radical nationalist political parties in Latvia. The leading parties, including the two ruling coalition ones, often communicate with the Russian media. Most Latvians watch Russian channels, so this isn’t actually a problem.”

A number of your MPs are dissatisfied with Zatlers’ failure. The minister of culture Sarmite Elerte declared that his defeat meant victory for the oligarchs. Will they now play a more important role in government? Will the three oligarchs in parliament determine Latvia’s destiny, as alleged by some MPs? If so, will the new president be able to keep his promise to ignore the interests of the oligarchs as well as any other “special interests” as head of state?

“I think he will, because that’s precisely what Zatlers did. Four years ago he was regarded as a corrupt tool of the oligarchs and he was losing popularity, even legitimacy. But he succeeded in changing this public attitude. I see no reasons why Berzins can’t do the same.”