The Istanbul Convention has become the apple of discord that now threatens to break apart an already unstable ruling coalition. The latest “thorn in the side” for both the Progressives (Progresīvie) and New Unity (Jaunā Vienotība) is the declaration signed by the National Alliance (NA), the United List (AS), and the Union of Greens and Farmers (ZZS), affirming the state’s commitment to act decisively to protect everyone — especially women and children — from violence. Yet if the goal of this alternative convention is also to protect people from violence, why do the Progressives and New Unity oppose it so fiercely, almost foaming at the mouth? Why does the controversy around the Istanbul Convention refuse to die down? BNN asked Filips Rajevskis, political scientist and co-owner of the communications firm Mediju tilts.
According to Rajevskis, Latvia’s withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention and parliament’s majority vote in favor of an alternative declaration show that once you politicize an issue, you must accept that politicization can not only help you achieve your goals but also backfire. “When the Istanbul Convention first appeared on the agenda as a document to be ratified, instead of it being quietly and calmly approved, it was turned into an ideological banner by certain political circles,” Rajevskis explained.
“In this case, those were the Progressives, part of New Unity politicians who lean toward the Progressives, and the left-leaning progressive forces then present in parliament. They believed that by turning the convention into their ideological flag, they could use it brilliantly in the election campaign — to distinguish themselves from others and to build their politics around this ideological cornerstone. They succeeded — only they forgot that, at some point, the fight against their ideological banner could itself become a political cornerstone,” Rajevskis said. “Now we are seeing the reverse movement.
The first thing we can observe is a certain shift from left-progressive ideology toward the right.
This is happening across Europe and the United States, and Latvia is part of that same political and informational space. Those who hold conservative views are now using this convention as their own flag, and that’s the first step in showing that this rightward shift is happening in Latvia as well.”
When asked by BNN what the picket in defense of the Istanbul Convention outside the Saeima, as well as the 10,000 signatures collected on the platform ManaBalss.lv, reveal about public sentiment, Filips Rajevskis’s reply was short and blunt: “Nothing.” The political scientist noted that ten thousand is a very small number. “If they had gathered one hundred or one hundred and fifty thousand signatures, as in referendum cases, then the political establishment would say, ‘Oh! That’s significant!’ But ten thousand is not a large number, and that small group of Progressive groupies who came to the parliament is not representative of the broader public — the inert middle class that ensures stability in the country and determines its politics,” Rajevskis concluded.
Read also: BNN IN FOCUS | The opposition could influence Latvia’s budget process. The question is – why isn’t it doing so?