Address by Foreign Minister Māris Riekstiņš at the 11th Congress of the People's Party [18 Oct 2008]

 

Colleagues and all those likeminded! Esteemed guests!

This year we live under the sign of Latvia's ninetieth anniversary.

For ourselves, as well as for others, we have put forward the motto Lights On for Latvia.

We are building Bridges of Light, and it is today that we are even Running for Latvia, in order to beat the Guinness record.

Latvia's 'race' in the arena of the strengthening of its statehood and in foreign policy has already been noteworthy and has duly earned the designation of a success story also in the international environment.

The first minister of foreign affairs of Latvia, Zigfrīds Anna Meierovics, whose merits in the recognition of the statehood of Latvia and the shaping of our foreign policy cannot be overestimated, knew that an independent state can survive for a long term only if it has friends and allies.

Meierovics wrote, and I quote, "it is necessary to conclude an entente, a sincere union between Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. These countries have much in common. These countries are united, first of all, by their sad past as states, and as national entities." At that time Meierovics could not even imagine that the world's most powerful democracies one day would become Latvia's closest allies. 

As we know, this idea of Meierovics was not then destined to become reality; however, the very orientation that countries of a similar character need to agree to co-operate in the name of their common interests is put into effect today. In this ninetieth year of the state of Latvia we have actually achieved what Meirerovics was writing and dreaming about. And even more.

Latvia can be genuinely proud of its freedom and its statehood, of its people and their achievements far and near within its borders, in universities all over the world, in concert halls, art galleries and theatre festivals, in research laboratories and in medicine, in international military and civil operations, in diplomatic missions, in European institutions and in the business environment.

We can take pride in the initiative, energy, enthusiasm and personal growth of our people; in the high evaluation of our country's experience, and in the opportunity to transfer this experience to new democracies and new enthusiasts.

The world sees us as a good people and as a good state.

It is worth bearing in mind that our statehood is not a static entity, but a dynamic value, and we ourselves are the strength and the driving force of it.

Also the People's Party during its decade of existence has grown from a beginner in politics, not only into a professional player in the domestic political arena, but also into an internationally reliable partner within the family of the European People's Parties.

However, in the light of these developments, I have to ask a rhetorical, yet well-founded question: are we able to take pride in our gains and are we often not underestimating those gains? Are we well-aware on daily basis of the values we possess - our sovereignty and its irreversibility, guarantees to the security of our state within the NATO alliance, our opportunities and also commitments within the European and transatlantic community?

Here, one must ask the question: how serious should be the probability of a threat to the welfare and security of Latvia for the sceptically-minded part of our country's population to realize the advantages and significance of Latvia's membership in the EU and NATO.

This summer has proven that frozen conflicts can really heat up; this autumn has proven that the fever in the global financial markets cannot be overcome in solitude. 

Many may have, for the first time, come to the conclusion that problems in far-away regions as reported by TV news programmes are in fact neither distant nor abstract.

With the events in Georgia during August, the post-Cold War world experienced a serious commotion of its security and stability.

The crisis in the Caucasus and its resolution was and still remains a challenge to the international community and to the efficiency of the international organisations.

From the first hours of the conflict, I believed that the task of Latvia was to urgently draw international attention to this conflict and to achieve its immediate cessation.

I consider that our voice was heard alongside other voices and followed by the response of the European Union and NATO. Cease-fire was attained. 

The European Union has expressed its grave concern regarding the conflict between the Russian Federation and Georgia, and the disproportionate reaction of Russia; it has also strongly condemned Russia's unilateral decision to recognise the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. This is a common position supported by us - 27 Member States of the European Union. Russia must take this position into consideration.

Therefore, I cannot accept the opinion expressed by one Latvian minister that this is only a conflict between Russia and Georgia, and does not concern Latvia, and also his reprimand that Latvia's response to the events in Georgia had been too hasty or too critical.

Conflicts like this may not and must not result in a reserved 'frozen' reaction on the part of the international community, including Latvia, whatever benefits some might see in that.

At the same time, I would like to emphasize my support to a dialogue with Russia and to a constructive, mutually beneficial co-operation in economy, culture and other areas. We are neighbours and as such we should sit down at the negotiation table to debate also the difficult issues and, sometimes, the ones, on which our opinions are essentially different.

However, I am going to stick to every word I have said and reiterate that Georgia's territorial integrity is not negotiable.

We will continue to provide consistent support to the Georgian people and to the Georgian state. With regard to this, I expect the Government of Latvia next week to pass a favourable decision on our further contribution to the reconstruction of Georgia, and to the revival of its economy and infrastructure.

The next commotion that the world is encountering on an unprecedented scale is the global financial crisis.

I believe that more often than ever before, people all over the world wake up in the morning and, even before taking their cup of morning coffee, try to check the stock market prices, the price for a barrel of oil, and whether with the sunrise also a new bail-out plan for national banks or a new deposit guarantee offer has been borne. People keep asking themselves, whether this affects, or could affect me or my family personally.

Residents of Latvia can be confident that the Government of Latvia in this situation is working together with its partners in the European Union in seeking the right solutions.

At the same time, also at the national level, we have to provide measures for safeguarding financial stability.

The example of Iceland clearly demonstrates how vulnerable a small scale economy can be during such an international financial upheaval. This more than ever affirms the necessity for Latvia to apply consistent efforts in order to join the Eurozone as soon as possible. In my opinion, the Central Bank in cooperation with the Government of Latvia has no task more important than the achievement of this aim. This is not only an economy issue but also that of Latvia's security.

The national budget of 2009 is an attempt to seek possible compromises between people's demands and the actual possibilities under the current economic circumstances.

Some have publicly called upon the government to provide higher wages and lower inflation which under present conditions can be compared to an incompatible wish to have more snow and a warmer climate at the same time. However, an increasing number of people are becoming aware of the complexity of the situation. Even the trade union leaders of Latvia seem to fail in convincing their supporters that only the Government is to bear all the blame.

Ladies and Gentlemen!

As the saying goes, the worst thing is to be left alone in the whole world. This may be equally true both regarding individuals and countries. Our situation would be by far more insecure, even critical, if Latvia were not a member state of the European Union and NATO.

I will take the liberty to say that security is not only the issue defined by the People's Party as a strategic goal in its programme or advanced by the Government as its principle. The guarantee of security is a common challenge both for domestic and foreign policy, and no-one could possibly raise any objections to this, not even our political opposition.

Maybe because of this we recently hear less from Euroatlantic skeptics as our membership in these organizations provides obvious advantages.

How would we picture Latvia's economic future under the crisis if Latvia were not a European Union member state?

What would be our sense of security if Latvia were not a NATO member country?

I am convinced that also in the coming years we shall have an opportunity to ascertain in substance, that the decision for Latvia to join these organizations was right.

People more often than not seem to forget the much-quoted NATO paragraph Five and cannot bring themselves to believe that an X-Hour  aggression against Latvia would be interpreted in the same way as an aggression against Canada, Denmark, France, Norway, Spain or any other NATO member country.

Latvia is a reliable NATO member country.

We have always conscientiously met our obligations within the collective security system, beginning from fulfilment of political pre-requisites and the modernisation of the army up to active participation in peacekeeping missions and political involvement in various conflict zones.

Thus it is probably only consequential, that according to an opinion survey recently published by The Financial Times, approximately 40 per cent of residents of France and Great Britain consider that the troops of their countries, in fact, sons and daughters of the respondents, should use military force to defend the new NATO member countries.

I must admit that it was a surprising revelation that – and I am speculating here a little – that 40 per cent of residents of Liverpool and Bordeaux should be ready to send their sons and daughters to defend Riga, Liepāja or Daugavpils in the hour of need.

It is quite understandable that, least of all, we would actually want to test the credibility of this survey.

 However, knowing how hard it is under democracy to reach any agreement at all, I believe that these figures are a very good indicator. We must bear in mind that the question was asked in time of peace, when people are not especially mobilised or in a fighting spirit.

In the name of Latvia's security, we have to continue to meet our commitments through political involvement in the settlement of conflicts, through support and modernisation of our armed forces, and through participation in peace-keeping missions.

If we proceed with the fulfilment of our commitments there is no doubt that our partners will fulfil theirs. We do not need, on a daily basis, to hear repeated affirmations of our security guarantees within the framework of the North Atlantic Treaty.

Therefore I would like to express particular gratitude to all Latvian soldiers and experts who are to conclude their mission in Iraq this year, and also to those diplomats, police officers, border guards and military personnel, who unselfishly and subjecting themselves to risk will continue their work in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Georgia, Moldova and elsewhere.

NATO is not a military empire, the aim of which would be to conquer new territories or to seek involvement in armed conflicts in general.

The purpose of NATO is to prevent such conflicts.

The goal of NATO is stability.

Therefore such a great emphasis in the agenda of the organisation is laid on political solutions to conflicts and on peace missions.

The current security level of Latvia is the result of a number of consistent decisions, including decisions resulting in the loss of popularity rating points. Those decisions, however, have been far-sighted, of national importance and correct.

Among the most significant decisions, I would like to name the withdrawal of the Russian troops, social integration, modernisation of the army, accession to the European Union and NATO, conclusion of the border treaty between Latvia and Russia.

It must be admitted that the conclusion of the border treaty between Latvia and Russia was a significant step in the safeguarding of our security. Open border-related issues have never facilitated mutual understanding between any countries and consequently also their political and economic relations.

For taking forward this decision of strategic importance, I would like to acknowledge the contribution of the Prime Minister of that time - Aigars Kalvitis!

On another security–related topic, a crucial aspect and a challenge not only for Latvia but also for the European Union as a whole is energy security, and the diversification of energy resources and supplies.

Much has been said about Europe's dependence upon one supplier but very few opinions have been voiced regarding the fact that so far the European Union has not yet succeeded in defining itself as a single and united consumer.

In the coming years, the European Union must be able to position itself as a unified buyer of energy resources, including of those from Russia.

With the European Union becoming a unified consumer and new energy supply routes being secured, we will boost competition and reduce the influence of politics upon the formation of the energy resource prices.

Discussion within the Latvian public regarding new solutions to energy capacities is only to be supported. However, it would be wrong when thinking of our independence in the energy sector, to ignore also other seemingly more expensive alternatives, including those in the area of renewable energy resources and the enhancement of energy efficiency.

Regional co-operation has a crucial role in energy security issues, including our integration into the European energy infrastructure. In this respect, noteworthy is the agreement just reached in Brussels to develop until the end of the year a European Commission action plan for the provision of electricity grid interconnection systems in the Baltic state region

Latvia has all the reasons to support the interconnection of each of the Baltic states with the common European energy infrastructure grid. In this context it would only be right that parallel to the existing link between Estonia and Finland, connections between Lithuania and Poland and also between Latvia and Sweden would be expressly developed.

Ladies and gentlemen!

I proposed to the last year's People's Party Congress that an analytical institute be established which would generate ideas related to conservative politics. I must note with gratification that such an Institute for Conservative Ideas has been founded and has already initiated and participated in a number of debates on the issues topical for Europe, including future prospects of the Lisbon Treaty.

However, speaking about current developments in Europe, I would like to turn also to the issue of the development of European identity in Latvia. The awareness of being a European, the world outlook characteristic of Europe, lifestyle and the sense of belonging to Europe is only to be promoted. 

For a longer period now the export of our products to European Union countries considerably exceeds exports to other regions.

Our students acquire their knowledge in European universities.

We are now able to travel all over Europe without restrictions.

We should open Latvia even more to European contents and its symbols.

The People's Party, in its time, proposed the idea of flying the national flag of Latvia both at the schools of Latvia and all the state and local government institutions.  I believe that the time has come for the European Union flag also to fly both at Latvian schools and all state and government institutions.

Approaching the fifth anniversary since we have become a European Union member state, I still cannot understand why the only programmes in the original languages broadcasted by our TV channels are those in Latvian or Russian. At the same time, movies and TV programmes in other languages of the European Union are provided with a voice-over translation.

It would be reasonable and educational if on Latvian TV it would be possible to watch foreign films in the original language with Latvian subtitles, bearing in mind that the command of languages for any resident is a basic capital to render him competitive on the labour market.

I urge the inclusion of this issue in the agenda of the National Radio and Television Council and its further action plans.

I am truly happy that the People's Party can reinforce links with Europe not only at the level of the government policies but also at the level of local authorities.

Our cities and towns are able not only to successfully apply EU funding for essential infrastructure projects. Many municipalities headed by the People's Party have established contacts with sister-cities and towns all

over Europe.

Cēsis co-operates in the social field with Tyresö in Sweden, but in the area of the implementation of projects funded by the European Union and of those in the sector of education – with Achim in Germany. Municipal residents consider cultural exchange with the town of Venafro in Italy to be a particular success.

Co-operation with Gesthakt in Germany has contributed significantly to the planning of the cultural heritage in the old city and to the solution of infrastructural issues. Student exchange trips are also taking place.

Kuldīga, in its turn, has a co-operation agreement with the city of Overijsel in the Netherlands, which provides assistance in development planning.

A special chapter should be devoted to Valka with its principal European co-operation partner – Valga. Their partnership with towns of a similar character in Sweden and in Finland is worth mentioning.

One could draw up a long list with examples of close co-operation in European spirit.

However, co-operation should not be limited only to the continent of Europe. I believe therefore that yesterday's announcement by the President of the United States on the acceptance of seven countries, including Latvia, to the U.S. Visa-Waiver Program will open new co-operation opportunities with partners across the Atlantic ocean.

All experience taken over by means of such horizontal co-operation is much more valuable than any top-down directives.

I appreciate that in our party there are people who are very pronounced ideologists of the European course of development. In their midst there are ministers, deputies and municipal leaders. 

I would like to express my particular gratitude both to the chairperson of the European Affairs Committee of the Saeima, Vaira Paegle, and to a member of the European Parliament, Rihards Pīks, for promoting the European spirit in the most positive meaning of the word.

Ladies and gentlemen!

We need a conservative and European policy which takes into consideration crises but does not lose a strategic vision into the future. 

The facade of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs building bears a motto: In unity, small things flourish.

This concept has been a cornerstone of Latvia's foreign policy. The achievements of Latvia's foreign policy have strengthened the security of this country and laid a solid foundation for our future development. 

I feel gratification about this fact and also about the significant role that the People's Party has always played in forging Latvia's achievements.

Thank you!