Opinion article.
In Latvian politics, there are people whose words still echo louder than their deeds. One of them is the former Mayor of Ventspils, now a deputy of the same city council, Aivars Lembergs. He is under U.S. sanctions for large-scale corruption, and Latvia’s courts have already convicted him of corruption crimes in the second instance. Yet only a few years ago, with his trademark bravado, Lembergs declared that the arrival of NATO forces in Latvia was comparable to an occupation. Yes, you heard that right – an occupation.
Aivars Lembergs once called NATO an occupying force and described the U.S. sanctions against him as “in line with North Korean standards.” These quotes remain freely available online and serve as a vivid reminder of how Latvia’s political elite once toyed with fire, belittling our security guarantees. The irony is obvious: while Russia brutally devastates Ukraine, NATO is the only reason Latvia is not the next victim, as defense experts stress.
After the annexation of Crimea, the former mayor and state official Aivars Lembergs said: “If NATO troops are deployed, that is essentially the occupation by a foreign state – the same as in 1940, when Soviet troops were brought into Latvia with Kārlis Ulmanis’ consent.”
“If NATO troops are stationed in Latvia, it means Latvia will become a potential battlefield between the U.S. and Russia.
In the long term, this will threaten Latvia’s economic, social, and security interests,” Lembergs argued.
He did not hide his stance even when speaking to Russia’s Channel One: “Some American soldier could launch a missile at Pskov or Moscow, and it could be done from Latvian territory without Latvia’s knowledge, because the commanders are Americans. And the retaliatory strike could follow, or will follow, against the territory of the Republic of Latvia. (…) Therefore, I consider the presence of foreign troops in Latvia to be extremely dangerous.” (translated from Russian).
Would Lembergs today dare stand before NATO soldiers in Ādaži and repeat that their presence is an “occupation”? Would he look into the eyes of the majority of society – which clearly supports the deployment of allied forces in Latvia – and repeat his comparison with 1940?
Today, as a NATO brigade is being formed in Latvia, military infrastructure is being built, and allies are investing billions in our security, Lembergs’ “occupation” comparison looks like a political stain of shame. It is not just a “historic quote” – it is a reminder of how dangerous and damaging such misguided political messages were, and still are.
The former Ventspils mayor’s years-long attempts to present himself as a “national leader” stand in sharp contrast to statements like these, which in essence are a gift to Kremlin propaganda. If a politician wants to be taken seriously in today’s security environment, the first step should be a public apology.
Read also: Lembergs wanted to ban the phrase “Lembergs’ Scholarship Case” but ended up as the loser