Author: Ilona Bērziņa
Latvia’s honorary consul in Chicago, US, Roberts Blumbergs describes himself as “one foot in America, one – in Latvia”. Currently one of his priority tasks is assisting with the organisation of European Parliament elections at the election site in Chicago. In addition to his work as a lawyer, he also works in the board of the Chicago Latvians Associations. He also provides financing to the Cognitive Sciences and Perception Research Laboratory of the University of Latvia and the Latvian Academy of Arts. He also frequently meets with US politicians to lobby Latvia’s interests.
One of the myths Russia intensely cultivates since the start of the invasion of Ukraine is that NATO and Western countries had promised Russia to not expand eastward, and that they have since broken this promise.
If we read NATO’s agreement with Russia, which was concluded in Paris in 1997, none of the points in this text say that NATO could not admit new members to Central and Eastern Europe. This agreement defined in principle the future of NATO-Russia relations and was based on Russia’s agreement to become a democratic state, to support political pluralism, not to invade other countries, to respect the principles of the rule of law. Unfortunately, Russia broke everything.
There was no such thing as a promise to not expand NATO in Russia’s direction. The once President of the USSR Mikhail Gorbachev admitted once that this topic was not discussed during this term, whereas then the US President Bill Clinton rejected Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s efforts to avoid NATO expansion, making it clear that NATO membership is decided by all member states and that the addition of new member states is only possible through a vote of consensus. Clinton also said that countries decide if they want to become NATO member states, it’s not NATO that looks for member states that don’t even want to be part of the alliance. Let’s not forget that NATO is a defensive, not aggressive alliance.
Recently, a Russian propaganda narrative has often been heard in Latvia that in the event of an invasion, NATO will not rush to protect Latvia, because what interest, say, do US troops have in fighting for us.
The US President is the Commander of the US National Armed Forces, and it is in his hands to make the decision to send US troops into combat or not. If US residents, legislators or president do not support the alliance, Russia may interpret it as a sign of the US refusing to provide aid. However, we have to understand that all other NATO member states will come to the aid of other alliance members, Baltic States included, if such a need appears. Let’s also remember that Britain and France have nuclear arms, and this fact on its own has a preventive effect. Although many often say – never say never, I don’t think Russia will attack any NATO member in the near future.
US congressmen Don Bacon, Marianna Miller-Meeks and Wiley Nickel visited the Latvian Embassy in Washington on the 6th of February and affirmed their strong and lasting support for Baltic States. What were your impressions from this visit?
Latvian Ambassador to the United States Maris Selgs and I saw the meeting at the Embassy as very important. First, it was a friendly meeting in a welcoming atmosphere with influential congressmen, second and foremost – we argued to them why the Baltic States are good partners for the NATO Alliance that can be relied on for the long term.
NATO is Latvia’s security guarantee and if someone things the 2% of GDP we spend on enhancing our country’s defences is too much, I would compare that to an insurance policy. Namely, a person pays a certain amount for the insurance of his house, car or other property, and in the event of an accident, the insurer pays him due compensation. It’s like an airbag. It’s good to never have to use it, but if an accident happens, you’re protected. Membership in NATO is very, very important for Latvia and it is essential for us to show the NATO soldiers in Latvia that we appreciate their presence.
I am very grateful to Gen. Andis Dilāns, with the help of which a few years ago the Chicago Latvian Society organized a nice event at the Adaži military base for NATO soldiers from the United States. It warmed my heart that Latvian entrepreneurs, having learned the purpose of the event, delivered Latvian delicacies free of charge. I learned a lot from Andis Dilāns. I learned about Latvia’s contribution to NATO and so I can also inform US politicians about it.
In the view of the US, it is very important that the Baltic States responsibly fulfil their commitments and defense spending exceeds the 2% of gross domestic product recommended by NATO. We told Congressmen that in December 2023, the Latvian parliament passed a law stating that Latvia will increase defense spending and in 2025 will reach at least 2.5% of gross domestic product, in 2026 it will be at least 2.75% of gross domestic product, but in 2027 and subsequent years at least 3% of gross domestic product. This is a new threshold for Latvia, but not the ceiling.
We also told the US congressmen that Latvia’s government has agreed to find EUR 200 million every year from 2023 to 2027. This amounts to EUR 1 billion in five years to develop a multi-layer anti-air defence system and to raise Baltic States’ defensive readiness and to procure serious arms like HIMARS, navy strike missiles and IRIS-T medium-range anti-air defence system. Latvia also continues developing it military infrastructure, UAS/C-UAS automatic anti-air defence system, as well as growing its stores of munitions. On top of that, Latvia has also brought back mandatory military service. Latvia is a small country, but we are doing all we can and all we have promised.
US congressmen listened to our story with interest, and it was important for them to hear that Baltic States have already purchased US military equipment worth hundreds of millions of US dollars, supporting the US economy and military industrial complex. We repeated to US legislators – the West needs to demonstrate to the aggressor that we are prepared to defend ourselves. History has proven that Russia understands only military power, and it had used our weakness as a pretext for provocation in the past.
US support is crucial to help Ukraine defeat Russia. Do you think the US will be able to agree at an internal political level to increase and speed up the delivery of this assistance?
The US has provided Ukraine with aid equal to EUR 74.3 billion so far. EUR 46.3 billion was military aid and EUR 26 billion was financial support. Still, I believe Europe’s role in aiding Ukraine increases with each passing day. Despite this, however, I am certain we will send Ukraine approximately EUR 60 billion worth of military equipment and financial aid. However, the future of this support is unclear because Americans are tired and divided in their opinions.
We, the American Latvians, are constantly reminding the US legislator that it is worth supporting Ukraine, because defending freedom and democracy in the world is a US value. We argue that by less than 5% of the US annual defense budget, America has helped Ukraine secure a stable and prosperous Europe, helped Ukraine protect our allies and NATO, and destroyed more than half of Russian troops. The US has helped Ukraine to ensure stable food prices and stable food security in the world. All this is also in the interests of the American people. In addition, it should be emphasized that no US military personnel participated in or died in the war in Ukraine.
On the part of the American Latvian Association and the World Association of Free Latvians, we also tell this to the US Congressmen and Senators who are in our favour. Dzintars Dzilna from the American Latvian Association is very active in this regard, my brother, Peteris Blumbergs, chairman of the World Free Latvian Association, who lives in Washington, D.C., also helps.
The US imposed sanctions on more than 500 private and legal persons from Russia in February and vowed to maintain pressure to stop Vladimir Putin’s war machine. In February, the European Union also agreed on the 13th package of sanctions, which also includes measures to combat the circumvention of sanctions. How strong are these sanctions and would new ones be needed?
Sanctions must be continued because Russia has not only a brutal dictatorship, but also an oligarchy. The sanctions against Putin’s closest friends – the oligarchs – are unpleasant for this group of people and for Putin himself. There is also a theory that Putin started a war in Ukraine because he was angry that Ukraine had arrested the Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Medvedchuk, Putin’s good friend and the godfather of Putin’s daughter. I read that even before the war, Putin planned to overthrow Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky through some internal political processes and put this pro-Russian oligarch Medvedchuk as president. Perhaps this is a somewhat controversial version, but one thing is certain – Putin was very angry that this subservient oligarch was attacked.
Russian oligarchs are now greatly hampered by the fact that they cannot enter either America or England, as there are bans and financial freezes in various countries around the world, seized houses, more appropriately called castles, and yachts. I am in favour for sanctions to be continued and all attempts to circumvent them must be prevented.
At the end of January it was reported that the US Senate Upper Chamber Committee approved transfer of frozen Russian assets to Ukraine. However, there are approximately USD 200 billion of the frozen assets owned by the Russian Central Bank remain in European financial institutions, and the EU has yet to reach a consensus on giving away profits from these assets to Ukraine because there are concerns about possible legal consequences. How justified are they?
There are several billion dollars worth of Russian reserves in the US, and there is pressure in the country to take them over. One possible tactic would be for the President to issue a decree to take over Russia’s bank reserves under a 1977 law that allows such action without the support of the legislator, but some lawyers believe that he cannot transfer these assets to Ukraine because the US does not own these assets. However, the Congress is also considering legislative changes that would allow the United States to take over Russia’s reserves and hand them over to Ukraine. There is also a movement among lawmakers to take over USD 50-60 billion from Russian oligarchs’ savings (not from the Russian central bank) in US institutions – the so-called REPURCHASE act – and transfer those funds to Ukraine. The legislative act, “Restoring Economic Prosperity and Opportunity for Ukrainians”, has already been approved by the US Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee at the end of January, and if passed by the Senate and House of Representatives and signed by the President of the United States, it will allow the confiscation of the assets of a central bank of a country with which the United States is not in a state of war for the first time in American history.
The story with more then USD 200 billion worth of Russian reserves in the EU, primarily Belgium, is more interesting. The European Parliament is moving towards the monthly transfer of several billion of Russia’s frozen reserves to Ukraine through Euroclear and other financial institutions. The big step would be to confiscate the entire USD 200 billion balance and hand it over to Ukraine, but in this case, the European Union is cautious and afraid of Russia’s reaction. They fear Russia may take over the foreign capital and properties in Russia in retaliation. But other experts believe that if Russia took over the foreign capital in the country, it would be disconnected from the international banking system, similarly how it previously happened with Cuba and Venezuela.
Law experts, meanwhile, believe that international institutions, such as the European Parliament, decided to take over Russia’s foreign financial reserves, it would justify property takeover. Perhaps the most important is the strong moral argument we cannot ignore – if one country illegally attacks another and causes billion dollars worth of damages to this country, the aggressor will need to pay for his actions.
I work in a special Chicago court program where we help young people from a bad environment avoid jail. In many cases they did something silly: like stealing a couple of things from the school while intoxicated. These young people need our help and understanding if they are to show a willingness to make amends. But Russia does not deserve mercy and understanding, because it invaded a sovereign country, killed tens of thousands of innocent people and caused hundreds of billions of losses to Ukraine’s infrastructure and economy. Russia deserves the full severity of the law and must repay Ukraine for its illegal aggression and heavy losses. We know that Russia will not voluntarily pay a cent after the war, so it must be done so that Russia pays Ukraine now and the foreign resources of the Russian Central Bank and other Russian finances abroad must be used to transfer them to Ukraine.
The news of corruption among high-level Ukrainian officials reached Latvia more than once in the recent past. At the end of January, it was revealed that several individuals, including ministry officials, had attempted to embezzle more than EUR 36 million in the purchase of artillery shells. How to avoid such situations, and is it even possible?
I am not a specialist on anti-corruption issues in Ukraine, but my advice would be to hire honest, determined and competent investigators, prosecutors and judges, as the risk of going to jail is the most deterrent to crime, as evidenced by US practice. But how to create an honest person is another matter and is rooted in early childhood, family, and parental morality.
What can be done to facilitate the reorientation of Latvian businesses away from Russia and Belarus in the direction of other countries? Can businessmen do this on their own?
Perhaps I am too harsh, but my conviction is that cooperation with Russia and Belarus should not be allowed, and the reorientation to the markets of other countries is indeed the solution. The Latvian state could help entrepreneurs with advice, financial support and opening other doors in business. Unfortunately, at the moment, entrepreneurs have to do 95% of the work themselves to open these new doors.
Latvia is part of the capitalist system. With all the advantages and disadvantages that from it. The government can help businesses ease taxes and bureaucratic burdens, while new doors could be opened with the help of trade missions, embassies, high-profile politicians, and honorary consuls. For example, Andrejs Pildegovičs and I once managed to get a meeting of several Latvian business representatives with the US retail giant “Walgreens”, because at that time the President of Latvia Valdis Zatlers also attended this meeting. Without President Zatlers’ visit, such a meeting would not have been possible. This is also why it is so important for business representatives to accompany the country’s president on trip to other countries. This is an opportunity we should not be shy to use.
The PBLA with the PLEIF conference and the Latvian Chamber of Commerce in the US with the Spotlight Latvia conference also help significantly in this regard, and they naturally rely on co-financing from the Latvian government.
You are an Honorary Member of the University of Latvia, a member of the Board of “Friends of the University of Latvia” and one of the patrons. How do you assess the competitiveness of Latvia’s existing and future scientists in the global market? Has Latvia, as a small country, made itself visible on the world stage in this regard?
It is important for Latvia to enter the highest level of scientific community. This is a matter of competitiveness, recognition and security. Latvian scientists like LU professors Andris Ambainis and Jurģis Šķilters have succeeded in this – their work is recognised and competitive. Each in their own way they are serious partners for the US scientific elite.
RTU continues rapidly developing and when looking from America – its looking good. The same can be said for Riga Stradins University and University of Latvia. I believe it is important to support scientific directions that were composed in Latvia in the past twenty years and that have high international recognition. This primarily means quantum computing and the development of the field of cognitive science.
Which Latvian goods, services, technologies are attractive to Western countries? What can help us become more competitive on the global arena?
Latvia has a very interesting, well-developed technology industry, especially in the field of information and communication technologies. US companies are happy to transfer technology development and customer service services to Latvia. I think other industries will be less represented. I also think foreign students in Latvian universities can bring a significant contribution to Latvia’s economy. They pay rather high tuition fees, they rent apartments in Latvia, they eat in our restaurants and cafes. Generally speaking, they leave large amounts of money here. A few years ago, there was a study that concluded that one foreign student spends more than EUR 12 000 per year in Latvia. This amount is now likely to have grown significantly since then.
Perspective industries include also specific companies, such as Printful and Printify, which successfully operate in foreign countries with their “print-on-demand” model. We can definitely mention digital microwave and data broadcasting equipment manufacturer “SAF tehnika”. Pharmacology is another perspective direction. Basically, these are the directions that require people to use their brains and I consider Latvians the smartest people in the world!
Also read: BNN INTERVIEW | Jānis Garisons: there are all conditions for us to defend ourselves
Follow us on Facebook and X!
BNN INTERVIEW | Roberts Blumbergs: Russia doesn’t deserve mercy and understanding
