Opinion article
The Belarusian fertilizer issue is no longer just about sanctions or politics — it is becoming a major global economic and strategic question. The United States is already holding discussions with Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine about restoring Belarusian potash fertilizer transit while bypassing Russia. At the same time, Latvia’s government once again appears absent from the conversation.
This should seriously concern everyone. For years, Latvian officials acted as if removing Belarusian fertilizer cargo from Latvian ports was some kind of geopolitical success. But the reality turned out very differently. The cargo did not disappear. Global demand for fertilizer remains enormous.
Instead, those flows were redirected to Russian ports and Russian railways. Today, Russian transport infrastructure reportedly earns around 500–600 million euros from handling these
cargoes. That means Russia continues benefiting financially from transit flows that previously moved through the Baltic region.
This creates a very uncomfortable reality: under the current system, Europe has not eliminated these flows — it has simply helped redirect the economic benefit toward Russia.
Meanwhile,
Latvia lost significant transit revenues, jobs, railway income, port activity, and tax contributions.
Industry representatives estimate that if these cargo flows moved through Latvia instead of Russia, the Latvian economy could benefit by roughly 125 million euros annually through taxes, logistics services, railway operations, terminals, and related sectors.
And now the United States itself is searching for ways to restore these fertilizer routes through Lithuania, Poland, or Ukraine, specifically to reduce Russian transit influence.
So the obvious question is: why is Latvia not part of these discussions? Latvia has the ports. Latvia has the infrastructure. Latvia has decades of experience handling mineral fertilizer cargo.
What appears to be missing is political initiative and strategic thinking.
While neighboring countries actively position themselves for future logistics flows, Latvia’s government continues reacting slowly and cautiously while major economic decisions are being made across the region.
This is especially difficult to understand at a time when global fertilizer markets are under pressure due to instability in the Middle East, rising transport risks, and concerns over food security and agricultural prices. Other countries clearly understand that this is not only about politics — it is also about economics, infrastructure, and long-term regional influence.
Latvia should be part of that conversation. Instead, the country risks once again watching strategic cargo flows, investments, and economic opportunities move elsewhere while officials remain silent. The biggest problem is that experts warned about this outcome years ago.
They repeatedly said that global fertilizer trade would not stop — the flows would simply shift to different routes.
Russia gained the revenues. Neighboring countries are now negotiating future transit opportunities. And Latvia is still trying to decide whether it even wants to participate.
Read also: Political scientist: If the US lifts sanctions on fertiliser shipments, there are serious reasons behind it
Read also: BNN IN FOCUS | “We support them, they support us” – political scientist on Latvia’s choice in the Hormuz issue
Read also: Latvia must choose – help prevent a global food crisis or continue feeding Russia’s war economy
Read also: US calls on Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine to allow exports of Belarusian fertilizers