Opinion piece: Krišjānis Kariņš, Latvian Minister of Foreign Affairs (New Unity)
Lately there has been an active discussion about the role of the prime minister in foreign affairs. There have been different assumptions and criticisms voiced about me. I would like to bring some clarity to this situation.
First of all I have to stress that while I was serving as Prime Minister of Latvia, I worked diligently in the interests of the state. During my term we were struck by two unpredictable crises: Covid-19 pandemic and Russia’s brutal war in Ukraine. The pandemic had disrupted the world’s usual life rhythm. Air traffic suffered greatly during the pandemic: people travelled less and airlines were forced to reduce the number of operating flights. Their regularity gradually recovered.
When the threat of the pandemic lowered at the beginning of 2022, Russia’s brutal war in Ukraine commenced. It’s important to stress that the government’s work did not stop once this whole time. International connections were maintained using video conferences during the pandemic. Eventually, however, political life returned to the practice of face-to-face meetings. I maintained contacts with my colleagues in other countries, including government heads in Germany, Britain, Canada, Spain, Holland, Denmark, Poland, Sweden, as well as the French president.
The latter is not only the top official in this country, but also the head of executive power in the country, similarly to the US president. It was in our country’s best interest to maintain the unity of NATO and EU member states this whole time, but also ensure Ukraine support in its fight against Russia, as well as ensure our own protection through support of our allies. The decisions we made were not self-explanatory.
At the time I was the only state official with direct contact with heads of governments of other countries.
This was due to the fact that I had been working and meeting with them regularly since 2019, as well as the fact that executives from other countries maintain regular contacts with their colleagues. The state president, Saeima speaker, minister of foreign affairs and head of the Saeima Foreign Affairs Committee work on their own to help prepare the soil for the decision eventually made by executives. During any crisis the leading role in our country always falls on the government’s shoulders with the prime ministers in the front. The pandemic and Russian-Ukrainian war were no exceptions.
It is a well-established practice in European countries that executive leaders meet regularly in the Council of Europe (to which some countries still delegate a senior non-executive officials). This institution makes decisions regarding all joint tasks, including joint procurement of Covid-19 vaccines, support for Ukraine and the condemnation of Russia. Although appointments are regular, they are very variable in length and are characterized by working until late at night or even early in the morning. During these two crises, meetings in this format occurred much more often than in times of peace. In addition, there were also informal meetings of the Council of Europe.
It’s important to mention that no one can replace the prime at these meetings. If our prime minister is not present, Latvia can be represented by a different country asked to do this. For example, there was one meeting during which I had to represent my Estonian colleague, who had fallen ill before the meeting. Any other minister, including minister of foreign affairs, can take multiple other officials to meetings of ministers. All ministers are replaceable.
The prime minister is irreplaceable.
In addition to extensive meetings, it is common practice for heads of government to go to each other for various informal conversations, thus gaining support for their ideas. This is similar to how representatives of political parties in our country informally meet with each other to agree on work to be done together. The difference is our country’s territory is relatively small, and we can reach our own officials quickly. This is not an option if we need to meet with colleagues from other countries.
It is common practice in many European countries that the government has its one or more planes ot use, which makes it easier for the head of government to get to any place at the right time. In the case of Latvia, the head of government uses commercial flights and sometimes special flights to get to the destination of the visit and return to the country on time. Previous prime ministers did not actively use the opportunity to meet with colleagues. There are different reasons for that, including the fact that there haven’t been any major crises in nearly five years.
However, one of the reasons for visiting abroad has been that every hour away from the country is an hour that cannot be fully used to run the government. Consequently, foreign policy was left more under the responsibility of the President and the minister of foreign affairs.
As the prime minister, I used the benefits of working internationally to the fullest extent. I actively participated in all the formal and informal meetings important to Latvia and met as much as possible with the leaders of governments of other countries in smaller groups or individually whenever it was possible. Especially after the start of Russia’s in Ukraine, the role of Latvia and other Baltic States had completely changed, because for years we had been warning about Russian threats, but no one listened.
As the situation changed, so did opportunities and the interest to meet with us – Baltic leaders. While it was important for others to know my opinion about Russia, it was important for me to ensure support for Ukraine and security for Latvia itself. Unfortunately, the interest in meeting the Prime Minister of Latvia does not mean that the leaders of large countries will free up time that is convenient for the prime minister or decide to come to us for a meeting. Individual meetings could not be arranged at the level of officials or advisors, but it was arranged by me through direct contact with my colleagues. This is when I was forced to adjust my schedule.
The State Chancellery worked together with my office and picked the most convenient way of reaching my destination.
Commercial flights were preferred, but special flights were used as well if logistics required it.
I will mention one specific case for illustration. On the 13th of June, 2022, I went to meet the Prime Minister of Spain for a bilateral meeting just before the NATO summit in Madrid. He offered me time and I quickly adapted. A commercial flight was used. I talked to him about our national security issues and the need to increase NATO’s presence to a brigade level (a decision had not yet been made), where I also received his support. During the conversation, I was also informed that Spain would deliver the NASAMS air defence system to Latvia, which continues operating today.
The next day I went to Amsterdam on a commercial flight and then on to the Hague by car, where in the evening the Prime Minister of the Netherlands had invited me as the only representative of the Baltic States to a meeting of prime ministers of NATO member states together with the Secretary General of NATO to discuss decisions at the Madrid Summit, including the deployment of a brigade in Latvia.
After the evening meeting I used a special flight to return to Riga, since the availability of commercial flights was limited. Work continue the next morning and I met with the governor of the Bank of Latvia and Latvia’s President. In this case and in all cases when I used both commercial and special flights, I went only as the head of the government to discuss and defend the interests of our country.
Today’s massive support of Ukraine and NATO presence in Latvia is the result of our titanic work. There wasn’t a single moment for rest or entertainment. It was the opposite – the State Chancellery had organised them to ensure it is possible to move between meetings in the most time-efficient manner, spending as little time as possible waiting for a flight or staying in hotels.
Naturally this kind of representation of the state is expensive.
Perhaps the State Chancellery could have organised it better, more cheaply and more transparently. Just as there was an active discussion in the 1990s about the car park for officials and its use. I think a discussion opened today about the possibility for senior public officials to actively and effectively operate in international politics using such resources.
I’m no longer the Prime Minister. I stepped down from this post when I saw that the government coalition needs to change and that the next generation should take responsibility. I can see the world has changed and that Latvia’s role has changed along with it. Latvia’s opinion is heard and we have a way to actually influence decisions on the EU and NATO levels.
I sincerely wish that the leaders of the current and future governments are not deprived of the opportunity to participate freely and actively in all discussions where they decide on the future of Europe, our security and our destiny. Our prime minister must be present there. It will take time and it will take resources. However, it would be dangerous to create conditions under which the prime minister is forced to refuse the opportunity to meet and influence decisions at the EU and NATO level just because the time spent on the road and the absence from the country would seem too long due to practical logistical reasons.
Also read: Ruling coalition in Latvia does not expect Kariņš to step down over special flights scandal
Follow us on Facebook and X!