June was hotter than usual, but there is no less heat in politics both in Latvia and in the world.
It seems that this summer is the hottest act in the Constitutional Court (ST). Disputes over the Latvian language in higher education institutions and kindergartens, the judgment in the Ombudsman’s application regarding the guaranteed subsistence minimum, territorial reform, which several counties are going to challenge. But there is another thing. In Latvia, a real storm on social networks was caused by the statement that “Rūjienas saldējums” is almost racist, because its name “Melnītis” has been translated by “Blacky”, which has a bad connotation in English. True, the translation was not successful, and the company had initially recovered from the recommendation to rethink the translation, but the Gagan wars that broke out on social networks divided almost everyone into two warring camps. For a moment, reading the comments, I felt that hatred vibrates in the air and can be felt even through the computer screen. In the end, those involved in the discussion more or less agreed that it was no longer a question of using names or words in Latvian, but of translation, and that care should always be taken with foreign languages.
There are a number of very serious trends in big politics that I think can shake the world. I have already written about a bill submitted to the Russian State Duma to repeal the decision of the 1989 USSR Congress of People’s Deputies that the secret protocol of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact is illegal and invalid. Continuing to rewrite World War II, Russian President Vladimir Putin has already publicly stated that the Baltic states joined voluntarily and that the pact was inevitable at the time. However, as I have already written, the Declaration of Independence of Latvia was not based on this decision of the Congress of People’s Deputies of the USSR, but on international law.
The Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has issued a statement stating: “The Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs categorically rejects this year. On June 19, President Putin of the Russian Federation spoke in the article “75 years of the Great Victory: a shared responsibility for history and the future”. The Baltic states were illegally occupied and annexed using threats and military provocations. The USSR violated its obligations under international treaties and committed an act of aggression. The sovereign will of the people was falsified in false elections. The illusory autonomy of the Baltic states during the Soviet occupation was only a cover for the criminal policy of the Soviet regime, which was determined by the leadership of the Soviet state and the Communist Party in Moscow (…). “
Of course, it is debatable whether the invasion of Latvia would not have started already in 1939 if Ulmanis had refused to allow the establishment of Russian military bases in the country, and whether Latvia had any chance to maintain statehood between the two aggressive and totalitarian powers. It can also be debated whether, without the Ulmanis coup and absolute power, Latvia would have resisted and reported to the world that it was being occupied. One can also ask – if there was a declaration of occupation, would Latvia be included in the USSR and not become a satellite country like most Eastern European countries after the Second World War. The big question now is whether the United States and China will agree to discuss the situation with Putin and whether they will agree on a new redistribution of the world, as will the position of France and Britain.
Putin has already taken a step further by calling on nuclear powers to sit down at the same table, discuss sanctions and agree on a solution. In other words, Putin wants a new redistribution of the world. Of course, hardly any expert is ready to predict whether Putin will succeed.
However, it is clear that the news and allegations circulated by Russia must be treated with great caution.