Moscow is watching Latvia. Is Washington?

Issue in doubt.

That was the unnerving radio message the US Marines sent to their commanders in November 1943, during the invasion of the Japanese-occupied island of Tarawa, after the first wave of assault troops encountered unexpectedly fierce resistance and the outcome of the intense battle – as well as the war in the Pacific – was in doubt.

As 2026 stumbles to a close, the same thing could be said about the war for democracy in Europe, including the mixed results of last weekend’s vote for the Saeima, the Latvian parliament.

There are two wars taking place in Europe today: the four-year-long hot war between Russia and Ukraine, and the war between right-wing populist forces and liberal democratic ones. Both are connected.

The latter struggle has seen victories by both sides this year, including a decisive win for democratic forces in Hungary, where the right-wing populist regime of Viktor Orban was defeated overwhelmingly in the national election by Peter Magyar’s upstart reformist Tisza party.

Then last month came the triumph of the extreme right-wing AfD party in the regional vote in Saxony-Anhalt.

Mixed. That is also the best way of characterising the results of the Latvian poll, where the pro-Ukraine, pro-EU United List party, led by prime minister Andris Kulbergs, won a historic mandate, along with a strong showing by the two leading right-wing populist forces, the Kremlin-friendly Sovereign Power alliance and the Trumpist Latvia First party, which together drew a quarter of the vote – all this against the backdrop of a scandalously low voter turnout of just 51.6 per cent.

A closer look at the returns from Latvia in a moment.

Latvia? Who cares about Latvia?

The question is not facetious. As someone who does a lot of travelling on both sides of the Atlantic, I am invariably surprised when I meet anyone who has actually visited the Baltic states or knows much about them.

Some with sharp memories might recall the Baltic Way, the historic, 400-mile-long 1989 protest in which two million Latvians, Estonians and Lithuanians linked fervent hands, helping to break the Soviet Union.

That is generally the sum of it.

This is regrettable, because what happens in the Baltic states matters more than ever.

It certainly matters to Vladimir Putin. Michael Ignatieff, the noted Canadian historian and politician, tells me: ‘World War III could start in the Baltic states. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine shows that his intention is not just to recover Lenin’s Russia – which accepted the independence of the Baltic states – but to reconquer the tsars’ Russia, in which the Baltic states were imperial provinces.’

Additionally, ‘the Baltic states are an internationally recognised symbol of freedom,’ Zanda Kalnina-Lukaševica, the outspoken deputy speaker of the Saeima, tells me.

‘Our story, from the decades of Soviet occupation through the Baltic Way, through the restoration of our independence 35 years ago and our return to the Free World, is living proof that democracy can prevail over authoritarianism.’

‘This is a particularly jittery time in European geopolitics,’ according to Oliver Moody, author of Baltic: The Future of Europe. ‘Russia has been intensifying its hostile activities towards the Baltic states and other European allies, including ever more brazen airspace violations of various sorts.’

‘These provocations have already destabilised Latvia’s politics,’ says Moody, the Berlin bureau chief of The Times. He points to the incursion last May of two stray Ukrainian drones, whose trajectory was likely diverted by Russian electronic warfare, events that led to the resignation of the defence minister, Andris Spruds, and the collapse of the former centre-right-led coalition, a development that Moscow predictably exploited for propaganda purposes.

‘Latvia and NATO cannot protect you,’ the revived Russian agitprop machine broadcast over Telegram to its presumptive listeners among Latvia’s large Russian-speaking population: Latvia’s approximately 650,000 Russian speakers comprise about 35 per cent of the population, a higher proportion than in any other NATO or EU state.

‘For a long time, these people have been portrayed as one of the alliance’s Achilles heels, as though they were a fragment of Putin’s Russia lodged in the West, waiting to be activated as a casus belli for an invasion,’ says Moody.

‘There have been any number of scenarios imagining a NATO-Russia war that starts with an uprising in Latvia’s Russophone community.’

‘Up until now these scenarios have not had much to do with reality,’ he adds. ‘The Russian speakers are in fact politically very heterogeneous.’

I saw this for myself when I visited Daugavpils, Latvia’s second-largest city, which has a majority Russian-speaking population, shortly after the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. I encountered only a small number of Russian speakers who actually supported Moscow.

Is Moscow’s seditious propaganda now getting through to Latvia’s Russian speakers?

The strong performance of Sovereign Power, now the main political vehicle for Latvia’s Russian-speaking voters, and the statements of its unapologetically pro-Kremlin leader, Julia Stepanenko, who opposes further aid to Ukraine, might indicate so.

The larger point is that attention must be paid. The Baltic states matter.

Is Washington paying attention? One wonders. Just before the election the Baltic states were roiled by the unsettling news that they had been excluded from a working group of America’s allies which the Pentagon had convened to discuss the future of NATO.

To be sure, neither the UK nor France was invited either. One can be sure that the commanders of the American, German, Canadian and British forces stationed in the Baltics were concerned.

Not to worry, Kulbergs, the avowedly pro-NATO prime minister, assured worried Latvians. ‘The US also discusses these issues with the Baltic states in other formats.’

Silence from the US Embassy and its new ambassador, Melissa Argyros, a Trump appointee who took office in February.

Are ‘these issues’, as Kulbergs generously calls the life-and-death matter of Latvia’s defence, being discussed?

One hopes so.

If push comes to shove, will NATO protect Latvia?

One of the most salient memories of my visit to Latvia in 2015 was an exchange I had with my Airbnb host near the small city of Valmiera, shortly after the Crimean crisis.

‘We hope that you will come if we need you,’ she said somewhat plaintively.

Given the recent mixed signals from the Trump administration, the question is neither a rhetorical nor an academic one.

The Russian threat, including the war in Ukraine, which draws ever closer to Riga in its various emanations, is certainly not academic.

Seven weeks before the election, NATO jets shot down yet another Russian-diverted drone that strayed into Latvian airspace.

That brings us back to the matter of Saturday’s election results.

As stated, the returns were decidedly mixed.

The biggest takeaway, as well as the most reassuring to western observers, was the historic success of Kulbergs and his motley centre-right United List party, which won 42 seats in Latvia’s 100-seat parliament, the largest number of mandates won by a single political force in the history of the second Latvian republic.

Kulbergs’ victory gives him a dominant position in whatever coalition he chooses to form once he is asked to do the honours by President Edgars Rinkēvičs. The coalition will probably consist of the United List plus the conservative National Alliance and conservative-leaning New Unity parties.

Observers who may have doubted the former businessman’s position on Russia were encouraged by the newly re-elected prime minister’s election-night statement in which he reiterated his opposition to the hulking neighbour to the east and to trading with her, as the leaders of the two populist parties had urged, and his intention to bolster Latvia’s defence, while pledging the country’s continued support for Ukraine.

All to the good.

Nevertheless, it is clear that the reliably raucous complement of 32 deputies that Sovereign Power and Latvia First will send to the Saeima will be a thorn in the side of the new government.

Meantime, Kulbergs, who only took office in May, after the fall of the prior government, remains something of an unknown quantity, as Pauls Raudseps, the Latvian-American editor of Ir magazine, points out.

‘Kulbergs is a bit of a dark horse,’ says Raudseps. ‘He was in office long enough to get people’s attention with his nightly videos, in which he cast himself as the no-nonsense businessman who will make the politicians and bureaucracy get to work, but not long enough for people to start wondering: is he for real?’

Also concerning, at least to this observer, is Kulbergs’ ambivalence on the sensitive subject of the Istanbul Convention, the 2011 Council of Europe covenant protecting women and girls from forms of violence and domestic abuse, which, in a shock move, the Saeima voted to withdraw from in October 2025, triggering a massive protest as well as an international outcry. Ultimately, Rinkēvičs returned the legislation to the legislature, noting the negative impact its withdrawal would have on Latvia’s reputation.

In the end, the Saeima voted to postpone final action until after the election. Kulbergs’ position on the explosive subject remains unclear.

The fact is, for all his charm and straight talk, the man remains something of a question mark.

So does his makeshift party, United List, as Sanita Jemberga, of Re:Baltica, the non-profit Riga-based Baltic Center for Investigative Journalism, points out. United List ‘itself is a risk’, she says. ‘It is not a party but an alliance of very different parts, held together mainly by the appetite for power: a menagerie of hard-line Christians and “family values” crusaders, political veterans and attention-hungry newcomers.’

‘Kulbergs belongs to none of them,’ she concedes. However, ‘whether he can stop this coalition-within-a-coalition from pulling apart is an open question’.

Stay tuned.

Then there is the matter of the shockingly low turnout. 51.6 per cent is the lowest in Latvian parliamentary history. During the run-up to the election, airwaves were rife with messages about how this was the most consequential vote in Latvian history, and why everyone should vote.

Evidently, the message didn’t get through.

Kalnina-Lukaševica, the deputy speaker, is also distressed by the turnout, while cautiously optimistic about the future.

‘Trust in democratic institutions is one of the underlying issues in Latvia’, she concedes, ‘and needs to be addressed. It is a political responsibility. People participate when they believe their vote matters and can deliver the change they want.’

Reflecting on the results of the Battle of Riga, so to speak, one is obliged to send out the same signal as the initial one that the Marines sent out from Tarawa in 1943: issue in doubt.

Of course, as we know, the Marines won that battle, and the Allies the war.

What will be the outcome of the current see-saw war for democracy in Europe?

For the moment, all I can say is that the ultimate issue remains in doubt.

One thing is certain: Moscow is watching.

Is the White House?

Tamila Zolotareva provided research assistance for this article.