The governing coalition is likely to do everything possible to continue operating until the elections, and it is credible that internal confrontation will not cross a line that would threaten the government’s survival, Lelde Metla-Rozentāle, a political scientist and lecturer at the Faculty of Social Sciences of Rīga Stradiņš University, told the news agency LETA.
In her view, the government’s current priority is to maintain stability while allowing internal clashes between coalition partners, which will mainly serve to outline each party’s individual positions. The political scientist stressed that such conflicts are likely to be managed and controlled so as not to bring down the government, while still enabling parties to clearly position themselves during the pre-election period.
Metla-Rozentāle noted that it is not in the government’s interest to create an impression of inactivity, as that would give the opposition additional arguments to question the government’s capacity to function. Therefore, in her assessment, the government will seek to demonstrate its ability to work by focusing on priorities set out in the budget, including strengthening defense capabilities, addressing internal security issues, and education policy. Additional dynamics will also be introduced by Latvia’s work on the United Nations Security Council, which began on January 1.
At the same time, the political scientist predicted that the government will avoid addressing socially sensitive and ideological issues,
such as family policy and identity-related topics. In her view, the issue of the so-called Istanbul Convention will remain on the agenda, but decisions on it will not be taken and will most likely be postponed until the next Saeima and the next government.
Discussing internal coalition dynamics, Metla-Rozentāle emphasized that the Union of Greens and Farmers (ZZS) will seek to actively use its influence in government to highlight distinct positions on value-related issues, environmental and climate policy, fiscal priorities, as well as state administration reform and the review of public spending. At the same time, in her opinion, ZZS is not interested in the government’s collapse, as leaving the government before elections would be a politically risky move given the party’s ratings.
She noted that being in government allows ZZS to maintain a sense of influence over political processes and to demonstrate to voters that the party is close to the levers of power. According to the political scientist, it is likely that ZZS will remain in government while periodically opposing other coalition partners on certain issues and cooperating with the opposition only in votes where interests coincide, in order to exert pressure on coalition partners.
In Metla-Rozentāle’s view, the The Progressives are also not interested in a government collapse before the elections. She stressed that the party’s electorate is predominantly younger and socially active, and that a government collapse could create, in the eyes of this electorate, a risk of chaos and conservative regression. She emphasized that the Progressives are therefore likely to remain in government while staying in confrontation with ZZS and highlighting their priorities on social, climate, governance, and transparency issues.
According to her, New Unity (JV) may continue to play the role of mediator, seeking to hold the coalition together and prevent its disintegration. Metla-Rozentāle noted that JV, after weighing gains and losses, has likely concluded that retaining the prime minister’s post and remaining in government is more valuable in the eyes of voters than leaving the coalition.
Assessing the possible actions of opposition parties during the pre-election period, the political scientist believes that the National Alliance (NA) will continue to focus on national identity, language, migration, and traditional family values, while maintaining a strong anti-Russia stance. In her assessment, after sharper rhetoric on the Istanbul Convention, the party has become more rational on this issue, seeking to balance its public image in recognition that voter views are not unequivocal.
Meanwhile, Metla-Rozentāle sees the United List (AS) as a pragmatic and constructive political force that may emphasize economic development, regional issues, and the quality of public administration, while positioning itself as a possible alternative to the current governing parties.
Speaking about Latvia First (LPV), Metla-Rozentāle emphasized that the party’s ratings are relatively high, but that such a political offering in Latvia may have certain growth limits. She noted that dissatisfaction with the government does not automatically translate into support for LPV and that, while the party is likely to retain a leading opposition role, its chances of becoming a significant government partner are limited.
Asked about possible post-election coalitions, the political scientist said that the decisive factor will be electoral mathematics and the distribution of parliamentary seats. She allowed for various scenarios, including different reshuffles among ZZS, JV, the Progressives, and AS, but did not rule out the restoration of another coalition model involving JV, NA, and AS if it allowed for the formation of a stable majority.
Metla-Rozentāle stressed that it is still difficult to predict any specific coalition model at this stage; however, in her view, LPV will remain a strong opposition player even after the elections.
Read also: BNN IN FOCUS | Three political processes in Latvia whose consequences we will also feel next year