The West Perceives the Latvian Election as Kremlin’s Victory

President of the European Council Donald Tusk considers the Latvian Saeima election results a turning point orchestrated by the Kremlin. Tusk’s opinions are seconded by the most prominent American and European media, who tell their readers that the pro-Russian (?!) party Harmony won (?!) the elections in Latvia. The reaction to the Latvian elections shows the full extent of the Western media community’s decline, with the replacement of reality with new myths of a Russian Threat.

“Our problem is Russia, which undermines Europe’s best. I can give numerous examples to prove that the Russian did not stop at anything to weaken European unity,” stated the European Council President Donald Tusk at a conference at the Pontifical University of John Paul II in Kraków.

The place and topic of the conference - Role of the Catholic Church in the Process of European Integration – apparently influenced the former Polish Prime Minister’s report. The Russian Threat is a question of faith. You must believe in the Russian Threat, without question, and all evidence presented must also be up to faith without any criticism.

So Donald Tusk gave a fitting caricature-like speech of the anti-Russian propaganda rampant in the West. Russia was responsible for the Brexit vote, Russia provoked the Catalan referendum in Spain, Russia used chemical weapons of mass destruction in Salisbury and launching cyber-attacks all over the world.  

It is highly likely Russia did that other thing you were thinking of.

The culmination of the European Council’s President speech was the statement that Latvia’s election were “all according to the Krelmin’s plan” and their result will be a turning point for the region.

Donald Tusk admitted that he is concerned by the Saeima elections. According to him, this could be “the turning point for the region – a moment that was planned in the Kremlin, and not in Europe.”

It is unclear which region the former prime-minister of Poland had in mind – the Baltic states, the Baltic Sea in general or all of Central and Eastern Europe. But that is not the important part. At least it is clear what concerns Donald Tusk the most.

He is afraid that the Latvian elections will lead to pro-Russian forces in the Saeima and a reorientation of the republic towards Moscow, which will negate all of the efforts to create a “buffer zone” to “contain” Russia.

The most confounding in all this is that Donald Tusk said this. If the European Council was headed by a Portuguese or Cypriot, then one could write it off as common ignorance, but it is headed by the former PM of Poland – a country from the Baltic region. Warsaw of all places should have accurate information on what is happening in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

Therefore, there was no way that Donald Tusk would be this afraid of a state anti-Russian agenda after the Latvian elections. He was the Prime Minister of Poland in 2011, when the Harmony Centre party (Latvian: Saskaņas Centrs) got 31% in the elections and was one step away from being in the government. Back then, the American Embassy was in favor of Harmony Centre joining the coalition, and the party leader Nils Ušakovs joyously said “Soviet Occupation of Latvia” on camera, but the “Latvians’ parties” still didn’t allow the Russians into power.

If Tusk read the supplied analytics from the situation in Latvia at the time, then what is he afraid of now with Harmony only getting 20% of the votes, with the very same “Latvians’ parties” have already promised not to form a coalition with them?

In recent years, Ušakovs’ party has recognized Crimea as Ukrainian, supported sanctions against Russia, backed out of the cooperation agreement with United Russia, and its leader personally welcomed NATO tanks in Riga’s port. So Harmony is not pro-Russia, nor did it win the elections. It will not get into power, and even if it did, Latvia’s anti-Russian policy would not change.

So Donald Tusk is either a fool or afflicted with a case of amnesia and paranoia. Or he is consciously lying, creating a new myth, alongside the biggest western media, of the victory (?!) of the pro-Russian (?!) Harmony party in Latvia.

And outlets that are considered the paragons of quality journalism have also helped in deceiving their readers on the Latvian elections results.

Their names carry respect and authority, so it is all the more surprising to see the legendary brands bring out such “fake news.”

The New York Times came out with the title “Populist Wave Hits Latvia, Lifting Pro-Russia Party in Election.” And said article states “The results delivered a serious blow to mainstream politicians and opened the way for coalition talks that, for the first time, could lead to a government that includes Harmony Center, a Moscow-friendly party that until this year had a cooperation agreement with Russia’s governing party, United Russia.”

The “paragon” of quality press New York Times even didn’t bother to check how the “Moscow-friendly” party is currently called.

And The Washington Post seconded that notion with “Russian minority party wins Latvian vote; populists surge.” First, the outlet noted that other parties refused to form a coalition with Harmony, even though it is a pro-European party that decisively severed all ties to United Russia. But a few paragraphs later, they disavow themselves and say that “…Harmony’s pro-Russian stance is still an issue.”

The Europeans are keeping up with the Americans. “Pro-Russian party wins Latvia election.” states the international Business New Europe. And this is reiterated by the German Deutche Welle “Latvia election puts pro-Russia Harmony party on top.”

But the prize goes to the British The Observer. “Russian-minority party 'wins' Latvia election” they give the relatively correct title, but then stoop down to rock bottom: stating that 2.2 million people live in Latvia, that Harmony has an agreement with United Russia and fights for the Russian-speaking population of Latvia.

So these guys didn’t just not research the situation in Latvia – they didn’t even open up Wikipedia. This is just embarrassing.

The reaction to the election in Latvia shows just how much the Western media community has declined, having grown accustomed to Russophobia and claiming “Russia did it.” This allows them to turn off their brains and just broadcast whatever rubbish is needed to the population.

The formal leader of the European Union is showing a complete lack of knowledge about one the EU member states, and this is a former leader of country in the same region. The most respectable American and European media are popping out fakes on how a pro-Russian party won in Latvia, about it having a pact with Putin’s party and Latvia being inhabited by 2.2 million people (while its actual population is 1.9 million)

I guess we should be thankful that they didn’t call it Lithuania this time.

What do Donald Tusk, New York Times, Washington Post, The Observer have in common in terms of this decline? The goal set before them.

To create the next “The Russians are Coming” myth out of nothing at all, in order to once again scare the common people with this “hybrid war” of the Kremlin against Western civilization.

This goal explains the current decline. Why study the situation in Latvia, when you need only spit out a headline on the “Russian Threat”? Why know the real state of things, when your job is to spread myths? Why be responsible and work on your mistakes, when you can blame everything on Russia?

Idiotism is a health risk for professional Russophobes. Their brain molds over with all of these anti-Russian policies. Why use it when all of their mistakes and failures are due to “Soviet Occupation” or “the Hand of the Kremlin”? Turning Russia into a universal excuse of their own incompetence makes one dumber. You can see the kind of mental deterioration this leads to in the Baltics… and now the Western World is becoming like that as well.

Translated by Pavel Shamshiev