Opinion article
The debate over global fertiliser supply chains is growing louder. Governments and international organisations increasingly recognise that maintaining stable fertiliser exports is essential for global food security. In recent months, the United States has also encouraged efforts to find solutions that would allow larger volumes of Belarusian fertilisers to reach world markets while reducing Russia’s role in transporting those shipments.
Yet in Latvia, this discussion is largely absent.
Mineral fertilisers have not disappeared from global trade. They continue to be exported because modern agriculture and global food production depend on them. What has changed is the route. Cargoes that once moved through Baltic ports are now increasingly being redirected through Russian railways and ports.
The consequences are clear.
While Latvia loses cargo volumes, jobs, and tax revenues, Russia earns substantial income from transit and logistics services. Every tonne of fertiliser that passes through Russian infrastructure generates revenue for a state that continues to wage war against Ukraine.
This is the central contradiction.
Western governments are seeking ways to reduce Russia’s influence over global fertiliser supply chains, yet Latvia appears unwilling even to discuss potential alternatives. We did not stop the movement of fertilisers. We simply redirected that business to Russia.
The result is that transit revenues that could have supported Latvian ports, Latvian Railways, and the broader Latvian economy are instead flowing into Russia’s transport and logistics sector.
That raises a legitimate question: why is Latvia accepting a situation in which Russia benefits financially from transit activities that were once handled by Baltic infrastructure?
As long as policymakers avoid this debate, Russian ports will continue to profit. And every euro earned by Russia’s transport and logistics sector contributes, directly or indirectly, to the economic capacity of a state engaged in a prolonged war.
For that reason, fertiliser transit is no longer merely an economic issue. It has become a strategic question about whether current policies are genuinely reducing Russia’s economic influence—or simply shifting business away from Latvia while allowing Russia to capture the benefits.
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
While Latvia remains silent, Russia profits: fertiliser transit continues to feed the war economy
