Latvian Political Monitor

From@KNL_LTV1

“Stabilitātei!” program “written in the Kremlin” against “Latvia can be loved in any language” – Raivis Zeltīts (ASL) confronts Svetlana Čulkova (St!) https://t.co/Y0FPUr3U7u

Open referenced post

From@AndrisKulbergs

There is a misunderstanding and incorrectly spread news/headlines in media = there is no threat to Latgale and no need to declare a state of emergency. It is just an unfortunate wording of the order's title and annotation from the document submitted by KEM @JanisVitenbergs on the TAP portal. The ministry document's text is misleading and ambiguous (it is a mistake, the minister will correct it), but reading it in detail one can clearly understand both its meaning and essence - to introduce a legal framework for action in yellow and orange warning situations. Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs' address to the public I want to clearly tell the people of Latvia: there is currently no reason for concern. Latvia's level of military threat has not changed. The risk of a direct military invasion threat to Latvia is currently low. This is confirmed by the information available to our security services, and the President of the State has also publicly emphasized this. Yes, we live in a time when Russia's war against Ukraine continues nearby. We must reckon with cyberattacks, sabotage attempts, provocations, drones, and other manifestations of hybrid warfare. That is why state services are operating in a heightened alert mode, we are strengthening the eastern border, and together with NATO allies we are continuously monitoring the situation. However, preparedness for a potential threat is not the same as an immediate threat. These two things must not be confused. Unfortunately, in recent days we see loud statements in the public space about "threats of escalation of Russia's military action" and the declaration of a state of emergency. Such formulations, detached from the actual security situation assessment, understandably raise questions and concern among people. I call on both ministries and politicians to be particularly responsible on this issue. Security is not a tool for pre-election rhetoric. One must not earn political points with people's fears. If any ministry needs a special legal framework to ensure the continuous operation of hospitals, energy supply, water management, or other critical infrastructure in the event of a threat, the government will evaluate such proposals and make necessary decisions. That is our duty. But technical and organizational state preparedness measures should not be presented to the public as if Latvia were on the brink of war. Latvia is a safe country. We are a NATO member state. Allied forces are stationed in Latvia. Our airspace is continuously monitored, the eastern border is being strengthened, and our security services work together with the allies. The government's task is to be ready even for the worst scenarios. That is precisely why we are strengthening state resilience and critical infrastructure. So my call to the people of Latvia: let us live our daily lives, be calm but vigilant. For politicians and state officials, my call is stricter - be responsible with what you say! I ask journalists before publishing claims to contact and clarify what is meant by the draft order in the Cabinet of Ministers system.

Open referenced post

From@AndrisKulbergs

There is a misunderstanding and incorrectly spread news/headlines in media = there is no threat to Latgale and no need to declare a state of emergency. It is just an unfortunate wording of the order's title and annotation from the document submitted by KEM @JanisVitenbergs on the TAP portal. The ministry document's text is misleading and ambiguous (it is a mistake, the minister will correct it), but reading it in detail one can clearly understand both its meaning and essence - to introduce a legal framework for action in yellow and orange warning situations. Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs' address to the public I want to clearly tell the people of Latvia: there is currently no reason for concern. Latvia's level of military threat has not changed. The risk of a direct military invasion threat to Latvia is currently low. This is confirmed by the information available to our security services, and the President of the State has also publicly emphasized this. Yes, we live in a time when Russia's war against Ukraine continues nearby. We must reckon with cyberattacks, sabotage attempts, provocations, drones, and other manifestations of hybrid warfare. That is why state services are operating in a heightened alert mode, we are strengthening the eastern border, and together with NATO allies we are continuously monitoring the situation. However, preparedness for a potential threat is not the same as an immediate threat. These two things must not be confused. Unfortunately, in recent days we see loud statements in the public space about "threats of escalation of Russia's military action" and the declaration of a state of emergency. Such formulations, detached from the actual security situation assessment, understandably raise questions and concern among people. I call on both ministries and politicians to be particularly responsible on this issue. Security is not a tool for pre-election rhetoric. One must not earn political points with people's fears. If any ministry needs a special legal framework to ensure the continuous operation of hospitals, energy supply, water management, or other critical infrastructure in the event of a threat, the government will evaluate such proposals and make necessary decisions. That is our duty. But technical and organizational state preparedness measures should not be presented to the public as if Latvia were on the brink of war. Latvia is a safe country. We are a NATO member state. Allied forces are stationed in Latvia. Our airspace is continuously monitored, the eastern border is being strengthened, and our security services work together with the allies. The government's task is to be ready even for the worst scenarios. That is precisely why we are strengthening state resilience and critical infrastructure. So my call to the people of Latvia: let us live our daily lives, be calm but vigilant. For politicians and state officials, my call is stricter - be responsible with what you say! I ask journalists before publishing claims to contact and clarify what is meant by the draft order in the Cabinet of Ministers system.

Open referenced post

From@AndrisKulbergs

There is a misunderstanding and incorrectly spread news/headlines in media = there is no threat to Latgale and no need to declare a state of emergency. It is just an unfortunate wording of the order's title and annotation from the document submitted by KEM @JanisVitenbergs on the TAP portal. The ministry document's text is misleading and ambiguous (it is a mistake, the minister will correct it), but reading it in detail one can clearly understand both its meaning and essence - to introduce a legal framework for action in yellow and orange warning situations. Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs' address to the public I want to clearly tell the people of Latvia: there is currently no reason for concern. Latvia's level of military threat has not changed. The risk of a direct military invasion threat to Latvia is currently low. This is confirmed by the information available to our security services, and the President of the State has also publicly emphasized this. Yes, we live in a time when Russia's war against Ukraine continues nearby. We must reckon with cyberattacks, sabotage attempts, provocations, drones, and other manifestations of hybrid warfare. That is why state services are operating in a heightened alert mode, we are strengthening the eastern border, and together with NATO allies we are continuously monitoring the situation. However, preparedness for a potential threat is not the same as an immediate threat. These two things must not be confused. Unfortunately, in recent days we see loud statements in the public space about "threats of escalation of Russia's military action" and the declaration of a state of emergency. Such formulations, detached from the actual security situation assessment, understandably raise questions and concern among people. I call on both ministries and politicians to be particularly responsible on this issue. Security is not a tool for pre-election rhetoric. One must not earn political points with people's fears. If any ministry needs a special legal framework to ensure the continuous operation of hospitals, energy supply, water management, or other critical infrastructure in the event of a threat, the government will evaluate such proposals and make necessary decisions. That is our duty. But technical and organizational state preparedness measures should not be presented to the public as if Latvia were on the brink of war. Latvia is a safe country. We are a NATO member state. Allied forces are stationed in Latvia. Our airspace is continuously monitored, the eastern border is being strengthened, and our security services work together with the allies. The government's task is to be ready even for the worst scenarios. That is precisely why we are strengthening state resilience and critical infrastructure. So my call to the people of Latvia: let us live our daily lives, be calm but vigilant. For politicians and state officials, my call is stricter - be responsible with what you say! I ask journalists before publishing claims to contact and clarify what is meant by the draft order in the Cabinet of Ministers system.

Open referenced post

From@RaivisZeltits

That's how it went yesterday. It looks like instructions for Čulkova came over the phone. I speak from conviction.

Open referenced post

From@RaivisZeltits

That's how it went yesterday. It looks like instructions for Čulkova came over the phone. I speak from conviction.

Open referenced post

From@Braze_Baiba

Our colleagues at the @Arlietas Consular Department are in contact with Nepalese and Chinese authorities, with the help of the honorary consul and relatives of travelers, to ascertain the whereabouts of tourist groups from Latvia. None of the tourists have registered in the Consular Register.

Open referenced post

From@atis_svinka

The state may demand 72-hour readiness from citizens only if it itself can demonstrate its 72-hour readiness. Currently, it is being assessed how decision-making and coordination of services worked during the storm. However, it should also be assessed whether responsibility was clearly defined, information was sufficient, and critical systems were previously practically tested. The public must know how long family doctor practices, pharmacies, water supply, fuel stations, ATMs, communication towers, grocery stores, and municipal services can operate without external power supply. After the storm, some family doctor practices even had to write off vaccines due to power outages. Latvia is not unique in this regard. Financial Times writes that the UK government is preparing a public information campaign on how to act in emergencies and the necessary reserves of water, food, medication, and other essentials at home. Citizen readiness is important. But alongside it, there must also be verifiable readiness of the state and critical infrastructure. https://t.co/x3kY17C7zi

Open referenced post

From@Lato_Lapsa

I remind all the enthusiastic ones - in November 2021, CIA Director Burns came to Moscow and warned Russia not to attack Ukraine.

Open referenced post

From@jautaprovince

“Puķins is not ready to attack any NATO country for another five years…” Remember the parquet generals, ex-generals and military experts' overwise rambling and comforting on TV? Wonder if the CIA director hasn't watched our LSM, that he doesn't know how much time we have and that we shouldn't raise panic?

Open referenced post