Austošā Saule Latvijai · ASL valdes priekšsēdētājs
Reply
@E_Stendzenieks I have never been a fan of VVF. May 9, the ban on the Legionnaires' march, the integration/multiculturalism policy are signs of her time. 'Moscow House' really fit in with that - together with 'New Wave', the intrusiveness of Russian media and other soft power manifestations.
Follow the party's FB and YT accounts 'partijaMMN' to not miss livestreams where 'Mēs mainām noteikumi' candidates comment on political current events. It is an opportunity to ask questions and immediately hear clear answers live. One more livestream tonight — at 20.00.
“Russian authorities are structured in such a way that they are never guilty of anything. Why did Wildberries die? Because Ukraine bombed it! Gas ran out? Ukraine bombed it! Internet went down? Ukraine bombed it!” — Sergey Aslanyan, journalist https://t.co/bZts7WceHE
Everything will be fine, Aivar! After the elections, Pro will be able to fight against the Latvian language together with Stepaņenko and Ainārs, restore Russian radio and TV, and again push hundreds of millions for NGO research. There will be no limits to your, Raudseps's and Nellija's happiness, because those nasty Nazis will no longer be in power. Start marking it now! #BezmaksasPadoms
Šlesers: “I will not allow the Russian language to be banned in our country!” However, NA last year before the municipal elections did not want to answer whether it could form a coalition with LPV in Riga, and also before the Saeima elections it has not said that it will not be in government with Šlesers. https://t.co/UKvu1twKDvhttps://t.co/UKvu1twKDv
It's nonsense. It's total stupidity. And then there is Vienotības's cancer Beata Somiņa, who, preening that with 200 million for NGOs is too little, puts on a 'Cartier Tank Française' watch for 6000 euros.🐷🐷🐷 Don't forget to vote for Beata and Vienotības's cancer, so that everything in their lives continues to be good and fat.
Russia’s Matryoshka bot network targets Emmanuel Macron’s political heir ahead of France's 2027 election. Eight fake videos targeting Gabriel Attal while posing as @Le_Figaro, @AFP, @libe and other French outlets were flagged by @antibot4navalny. https://t.co/v2HWoc0na0
Those who, as ministers and MPs, let everything go to the dogs criticize Dombrava the most. I am not the interior minister's advocate or party member, but in my opinion, he started his work promisingly and with the right emphasis, and will soon also gain international experience.
Jaunā konservatīvā partija · JKP līdzpriekšsēdētājs, Jelgavas vicemērs
Tweet
I looked at the presentation on NGO funding: https://t.co/3JrH0tMROt Overall, it's not complete crap... Main financial flows and totals have been identified. For example, that NGOs receive 25.9% of income from grants and subsidies, so the basis is other types of income. Problems have been identified, e.g., one function for one NGO is funded by several ministries. This is possibly a problem of the number of ministries, not NGOs. Significant sports funding is redistributed through NGOs. My question has always been: who defines sports policy in Latvia under this funding model? It is proposed to increase bureaucracy for everyone to get better data to present to the government and to better control the use of funds. Of course, no simple solution is offered that would save millions and at the same time no one would suffer. The field of work is very broad. This government raised this topic and it is worth continuing to study it so that each ministry prepares specific proposals for a more efficient, transparent system. But it would be important not to create new bureaucratic burdens for all involved. It is clear that the next governments will already work on this topic, because this one can only introduce some cosmetic fixes.
Latvia 🇱🇻 and the UK 🇬🇧, with Ukraine 🇺🇦 as co-sponsor, will convene an Arria-Formula meeting on the treatment of POWs, civilian detainees and foreign fighters in the context of Russia's war against Ukraine. 📌 Monday, 10 August ⏰ 10:00 a.m. 📲 LIVE on @UNWebTV: https://t.co/Y4VqzvcgBu ❗️An outstanding panel of briefers, including @UN Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights Claudia Fuentes Julio. ❗️Hear powerful testimonies from two survivors of Russian captivity, as well as Sheida Kiran, a member of the production team behind the @bbcworldservice Eye documentary “Putin's Foreign Fighters” https://t.co/BhIt2oIdmc@BBCNawal@BBC@UNHumanRightsNY
Jaunā konservatīvā partija · JKP līdzpriekšsēdētājs, Jelgavas vicemērs
Reply
It's about the benefits. If the minister shows muscles to his groupies, but nothing changes either in Latvia or internationally, then what's the point? We cannot protect our own border ourselves. Inside Poland, cars with LV plates are stopped because we have become a transit country for illegal migrants. Where is the action plan and resources allocated to our own problems? Maybe we should have asked Spain for help?
Today, Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braže @Braze_Baiba is in Ukraine for her sixth visit. It is important that the Minister came to Kyiv from Odesa, where she had a full schedule of activities. We are always grateful to those partners who are here in Ukraine, alongside our people – supporting us and enduring Russian strikes with us. Especially when Russia brandishes its ballistic missiles every day. I informed the Minister about the consequences of today’s attack, and we also discussed the further implementation of the PURL and SAFE programs, food security and Russian attacks on Ukrainian ports, support for Ukraine’s European integration, and the opening of four more negotiating clusters. I thank Latvia for all its support since the very beginning of this war.
About Spain's NATO contingent in Ādaži - this is a NATO, not EU migration policy issue - these two things cannot be linked, and the threat that 'the Spanish will leave' is as justified as the previous threat that the Canadians would take offense. Spain moreover itself is a framework nation for NATO's battle group in Slovakia and provides a significant contingent to the French-led format in Romania - if anyone truly cares about our security, it would be more productive for the foreign ministry to actively communicate with Madrid and obtain a clear assurance that Spain's commitments elsewhere will not affect its presence in Latvia, rather than panic over a letter whose content none of the critics have seen.
PRO rank-and-file members for the second day in one breath are proclaiming that @JanisDombrava is a 'threat to Latvia's security' and that he is unjustifiably 'lecturing Spain,' that they feel 'ashamed on behalf of others' and that any moment now Spain's NATO contingent will leave Latvia. It is precisely their hysterical tone that is why I will comment on this at all. The only difference is that, unlike PRO & co, I have not merely heard of some letter from 'Panorāma's' account without content or references - I know the letter's content and context. First, about the method that must be eradicated from Latvian politics. Every time the adoption of some political decision turns out to be disadvantageous or unpleasant for someone, the same card is played - 'the allies will take offence,' 'the allies will leave.' We heard this when we considered Latvia's withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention - the same characters who today cry over Dombrava's letter to Spain threatened that Canada would reconsider its NATO presence in Latvia. Now - the Spanish. This rhetoric is not any concern for security; it is discrediting allied reliability to score political points - as if our NATO partners were frivolous and capricious dilettantes who determine their commitments to Latvia by how much they like one minister's letter to another minister. If anyone really thinks that about Spain or Canada - that is an insult to them, not to Dombrava. On the content, which none of the shouters has read, yet they know everything well enough to comment. The letter is not an ultimatum and creates no new obligations for Latvia - on the contrary, it expresses solidarity with Spain over the victims in Ceuta, offers technical assistance and the experience Latvia has gained in five years of hybrid war conditions on the Belarusian border. This aligns exactly with what government representatives said in January during the Saeima foreign policy debate: Latvia is ready to share experience within the solidarity mechanism, but we will not accept new migrants and will not pay for them. The letter also names the core of the problem - the legalization of more than half a million illegal migrants in Spain, which Latvia rightly does not consider merely a Spanish internal affair, because the consequences of this decision will affect the entire Schengen area. Latvia has just also joined a letter from 22 EU leaders calling for coordinated action to address this crisis - at the same time as Italy, Finland and Denmark openly demanded Spain's exclusion from the Schengen area. The 22 EU leaders warned about exactly the same thing - that the legalization of illegal migrants has sent a signal that illegal entry can turn into legal residence. By itself, a letter from one EU member state's minister to another country's minister is nothing unusual - interior ministries in Europe regularly communicate and coordinate with each other - that is daily practice, not a scandal. And last. This letter arose on the basis left as a legacy by the previous government - the question of the migrant solidarity mechanism within the EU migration pact, unresolved at the political level for nine months. It is a direct failure of former interior minister Kozlovskis. Most likely in autumn Latvia will have to make payments precisely because Cyprus, Greece, Italy and Spain have not wanted the alternative (technical) support Latvia offered - because this issue was never raised at the political level. Dombrava finally did that with the help of this letter. I will remind that in international diplomacy such mutual working correspondence between officials is not usually published. Unless it has been deliberately politicized or leaked. Here everyone can speculate about the reasons and how this information reached the media. This way PRO will not succeed in washing their own ugliness with the Rasima affair into oblivion.
PRO rank-and-file members for the second day in one breath are proclaiming that @JanisDombrava is a 'threat to Latvia's security' and that he is unjustifiably 'lecturing Spain,' that they feel 'ashamed on behalf of others' and that any moment now Spain's NATO contingent will leave Latvia. It is precisely their hysterical tone that is why I will comment on this at all. The only difference is that, unlike PRO & co, I have not merely heard of some letter from 'Panorāma's' account without content or references - I know the letter's content and context. First, about the method that must be eradicated from Latvian politics. Every time the adoption of some political decision turns out to be disadvantageous or unpleasant for someone, the same card is played - 'the allies will take offence,' 'the allies will leave.' We heard this when we considered Latvia's withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention - the same characters who today cry over Dombrava's letter to Spain threatened that Canada would reconsider its NATO presence in Latvia. Now - the Spanish. This rhetoric is not any concern for security; it is discrediting allied reliability to score political points - as if our NATO partners were frivolous and capricious dilettantes who determine their commitments to Latvia by how much they like one minister's letter to another minister. If anyone really thinks that about Spain or Canada - that is an insult to them, not to Dombrava. On the content, which none of the shouters has read, yet they know everything well enough to comment. The letter is not an ultimatum and creates no new obligations for Latvia - on the contrary, it expresses solidarity with Spain over the victims in Ceuta, offers technical assistance and the experience Latvia has gained in five years of hybrid war conditions on the Belarusian border. This aligns exactly with what government representatives said in January during the Saeima foreign policy debate: Latvia is ready to share experience within the solidarity mechanism, but we will not accept new migrants and will not pay for them. The letter also names the core of the problem - the legalization of more than half a million illegal migrants in Spain, which Latvia rightly does not consider merely a Spanish internal affair, because the consequences of this decision will affect the entire Schengen area. Latvia has just also joined a letter from 22 EU leaders calling for coordinated action to address this crisis - at the same time as Italy, Finland and Denmark openly demanded Spain's exclusion from the Schengen area. The 22 EU leaders warned about exactly the same thing - that the legalization of illegal migrants has sent a signal that illegal entry can turn into legal residence. By itself, a letter from one EU member state's minister to another country's minister is nothing unusual - interior ministries in Europe regularly communicate and coordinate with each other - that is daily practice, not a scandal. And last. This letter arose on the basis left as a legacy by the previous government - the question of the migrant solidarity mechanism within the EU migration pact, unresolved at the political level for nine months. It is a direct failure of former interior minister Kozlovskis. Most likely in autumn Latvia will have to make payments precisely because Cyprus, Greece, Italy and Spain have not wanted the alternative (technical) support Latvia offered - because this issue was never raised at the political level. Dombrava finally did that with the help of this letter. I will remind that in international diplomacy such mutual working correspondence between officials is not usually published. Unless it has been deliberately politicized or leaked. Here everyone can speculate about the reasons and how this information reached the media. This way PRO will not succeed in washing their own ugliness with the Rasima affair into oblivion.
Dombrava's letter (if it exists) shows nonsense at all levels. Both in that the minister allows himself, without the powers given to him, to directly lecture other countries, and in that LSM creates a scandal without even saying what was in that letter, without even naming which Spaniards were outraged.