It’s a commonplace of Scottish political discourse to compare our nation of 5.2m to independent near-neighbours such as the Nordics – Denmark, say, with its 5.6m – or, more recently, the Baltics, with their 6.2m in three countries. ‘We could be just like them.’ But comparisons can be facile. Latvia, with its 2m people, is a case in point.
Take a look at the Museum of Occupation, temporarily housed in an art gallery on Raina Boulevard in Riga, the capital. Between 1939 and 1949, straddling Soviet and Nazi occupations, one exhibit reads, the country lost almost a third of its pre-war population (or 550,000 people). A prolonged period of enforced Russification brought in 800,000 foreigners in half a century. Native Latvians formed 75% of the population in 1935 but only 52% in 1989 when Russians were 34%. The population has declined by 650,000 since independence in 1991.
Occupation, depopulation, deportation, these have all made Latvians ultra-sensitive to security issues. (The country joined Nato in 1994 and it now houses the alliance’s new strategic communications centre). It’s hardly surprising that relations with Russia, and specifically its violent destabilisation of Ukraine, are a priority issue for Latvia’s six-month presidency of the EU – now approaching its halfway mark.
Senior politicians I met earlier in that presidency are keen, too, to stress the EU’s eastern partnership – its relations with half a dozen ex-Soviet republics. The country’s 100 MPs – who debate in a chamber that once was home to the Latvian Supreme Soviet and previously the Gestapo’s HQ – back stronger sanctions against Moscow and greater financial support for its vulnerable neighbours. Diana Potjomkina, a research fellow at the Latvian Institute of International Affairs, wrote on Carnegie Europe’s blog page about the Eastern Partnership: ‘Latvia has moved beyond pro-democracy declarations and now has an ambitious goal to revive and revamp the initiative through small but logical steps.’ It is now trying to bring Belarus ‘in from the cold.’
Edgars Rinkevics, foreign minister, told visiting EU correspondents back in January that its presidency would not be ‘anti-Russian.’ But there’s a huge wariness among Latvians about Vladimir Putin’s intentions, especially given the size of the Russian minority in the population. ‘Some people are genuinely concerned there’ll be another invasion,’ Ojars Eriks Kalnins, chairman of the Parliament’s foreign affairs committee and an ex-ambassador, told me. ‘But others think you can work with the Russians and stop the dismemberment of Ukraine. It’s not a job for Latvia alone. All this has to be done at an EU level; Europe must speak with one voice.’
Lolita Cigane, who chairs the Parliament’s European affairs committee, is more ambitious. She sees the central goal of the presidency as making other Europeans understand the reality of the current geo-political situation: Russian aggression. ‘We warned from 2000 about Russia not being what it looked like and have been quite realistic about what we can expect from a country that, at the very least, has been engaged in cyber-war…’
She is convinced that a small country like Latvia can punch above its weight in EU and global affairs. ‘This,’ she says of the presidency, ‘is us becoming an equal partner on an equal footing with everybody else – like Germany and France.’
The comparison with, say, France is a huge claim and one that’s at odds with the views of at least some political scientists in Scotland. Juliet Kaarbo and Daniel Kenealy of Edinburgh University wrote pre-referendum that ‘..small states can carve out niche roles, champion specific issues, and broker agreements, as they often enjoy more credibility and neutrality than larger states, because of their small size … Small states can use their power, and particularly their “soft” power of persuasion and example-setting, in smart ways to advance their interests and exert influence.’
In their book, Small Nations in a Big World (Luath, 2014), Michael Keating and Malcolm Harvey of Aberdeen University argued that – in an EU context – smaller member states ‘need to be more active and to establish their credentials as good Europeans.’ (P134). Small states can use this to their benefit and Ms Cigane insists that this is what Latvia has done: got to know how the EU works in its ten years of membership and done its homework. And, obviously, work closely and co-operatively with Berlin. Mr Kalnins is clear too: ‘We’re no longer just members; we’re influencing the political process.’
He also sets the bar high on the economic front: Latvia’s priorities are, he says, ‘competitiveness, the digital single market, making Europe a strong global player economically and politically.’ The country, as Charlemagne pointed out in The Economist, has an interesting story to tell economically. Ms Cigane insists it’s a model lesson in how to recover from economic crisis. It’s not one that will appeal to the bulk of Scottish political opinion.
Effectively, Latvia has gone in a decade from boom to bust to, well, rising growth of around 4% a year – now within the Eurozone since January 1 last year. Its route has been praised by ordo-liberal Germany: savagely austerian. Its GDP fell by some 18% after the 2008 crisis broke; the centre-right government slashed public spending and wages, removed (already limited) union bargaining powers (‘structural reforms’ and ‘internal devaluation’ a la grecque). The jobless rate rose above one in five. It has now halved to just over 10% while growth – hit by Eurozone stagnation and Russian counter-sanctions – is forecast by Brussels to be 2.9% this year. Wages rose by an estimated 7% in 2014. Ms Cigane says that Latvia is ‘frustrated’ by the inability of bigger EU countries (France, Italy) to reform.
Latvia’s experience, then, is hardly likely to become a template for any Scottish government that one can envisage, certainly on the economy. The majority of the political class here currently eschews the neoliberal approach favoured by Riga. Its predilection is much more for the social investment model that is or used to be the hallmark of the Nordics. As Keating and Harvey put it: ‘There is a broad commitment to the social investment model in its social democratic variant but a reluctance to pay for it.’
But, so far, Latvia’s presidency of the EU is evidence that small states can set ambitious goals. Achieving them is another story.
Leave a Reply