Will this time with the mixing of the Victory Park monument go beyond talking?

As Rihards Kohl (NA), the chairman of the Saeima Foreign Affairs Committee, reminded at the sitting of the Foreign Affairs Committee a week and a half ago, the commission could not advance the demolition initiative because Latvia would comply with its international obligations. Has the situation changed since Russia’s brutal war in Ukraine? The deputies of the Saeima could not answer this question and passed it to the Ministry of Justice.

The LTV program “de facto” reminds that every year on May 9, thousands of flowers come to the monument in Victory Park. But the event has become much more than just a memory of the fallen. It is a great opportunity to catch supporters for the Russian electorate-oriented political forces. It is also a feast, not respecting that Latvia had no liberation at the end of the war and a long occupation followed. The festivities became more grand when Nila Ushakov (S) became mayor of Riga. May 9 is also an opportunity for the Kremlin to spread its symbols and messages to the Russian community. For example, the face of the Russian referendum, Vladimir Linderman, came to the monument on May 9 after the annexation of Crimea with the flag of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic.

–

For these and other reasons, there have been several discussions about the demolition of the Soviet symbol. And the farthest was the initiative launched in 2017 by Uģis Polis, who at that time was not associated with any political force, but is now a member of the National Union.

“This is a very painful topic for Latvian society. It is painful to see the Victory Monument from the point of view that it is associated with the repression of the majority of the society that followed the invasion of the Soviet troops, ”says the author of the initiative.

In 2019, the Saeima submitted an application with 10,000 signature commissions, but no visible continuation followed. Couldn’t even create a workgroup. “Yes, this initiative remained frozen,” concludes Paul. It has now resumed after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Initiatives to dismantle the monument stop at lawyers every time. The agreement on the social protection of Russian military pensioners concluded between Russia and Latvia does not allow the monument to be demolished. It was signed in Moscow in April 1994, along with other agreements that provided for the withdrawal of the Russian army and determined the status of the Skrunda radar station.

–

Article 13 of the agreement signed in Moscow stipulates that Latvia shall ensure the cleaning, improvement and preservation of memorial buildings and mass burial places for soldiers. Lithuania and Estonia, for example, do not have such obligations.

However, the specific monument is not mentioned in the document. However, after the unsuccessful bombing in 1997 by the Thunder Crusaders, killing two of those involved, Russia and Latvia exchanged notes that were secret, but, according to the Foreign Service, the interstate agreement also linked the monument to Victory Parak. The OSCE monitors the implementation of the agreement.

“Understanding the situation we are in with regard to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, we would call for the search for solutions that do not endanger Latvia’s international obligations,” Deputy Secretary of State Atis Lots told the Saeima Foreign Affairs Committee about the dismantling of the monument.

–

Taking into account that the Minister of Justice Jānis Bordāns (K) also spoke about the dismantling of the monument a few days after the start of the war, the deputies of the commission instructed the ministry to offer solutions for the demolition of the monument. According to the “de facto” minister, specialists are preparing at least three possible routes.

“It simply came to our notice then [nojaukšanai] already is and that colleagues want to do it, only so far there has been such caution, fear of the unknown.

What I can say to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will be on their shoulders to a large extent, and in such cases they may still choose to take risks, try, take on their efforts or not. But the Ministry of Justice is ready to help find solutions, “said Bordan.

In an interview with LTV this week, the judge of the Court of Justice of the European Union LTV expressed the opinion that international obligations can be viewed differently in wartime: “ in fact the heir to the Soviet army, this monument marks the aggressor. ” She called for a look at the practice of international law that allows international agreements to be revised.

At least a part of the deputies receive the lawyer’s statements in the Saeima with the hope that everything is not over yet, and are waiting for the proposals of the Ministry of Justice.

–

“I think now is the time to find a solution. If high-level lawyers say that the war gives an opportunity to look at the treaties differently, then it must also be used, ”says Ainars Latkovskis, the chairman of the New Unity Saeima faction.

Maris Kučinskis, a deputy of the Union of Greens and Farmers and the head of the National Security Commission of the Saeima, also believes that “it is time to deal with it, to deal with it civilized and legally”, meaning the demolition of the monument.

In his interview with LTV this week, the Chairman of the National Association, Member of the Saeima Raivis Dzintars, said: “If it were our saying, this symbol would no longer be there.”

However, not everyone in Parliament has this view. Jānis Urbanovičs, the leader of the “Harmony”, considered the demolition of the monument a provocative idea when it appeared in the Saeima, and in his opinion, nothing has changed: “All activities around the monument are from the same picture book as in the background. May 9 comes, confuses him again. This has been happening for more than 10 years. It’s a tradition for us, like a graveyard. ” Urbanovich believes that instead of unilaterally withdrawing from the agreement, Latvia should start talking to Russia about breaking it.

–

It is safe to predict that Russia would not agree to anything like this and that the negotiations would come to a standstill.

However, the issue of dismantling the monument in Victory Park is not only legal. Krista Baumane, a member of the Development Committee, pointed out in the Foreign Affairs Committee that manipulations around the monument would increase tensions in society. And Mārtiņš Kaprāns, a researcher at the University of Latvia, also calls for these considerations to be weighed in the cups.

“[Cilvēki] thinks we will now demolish the monument and the symbol will disappear. The symbol is already in the head, the symbol is not the block of stone standing there.

[Nojaukšana] does not in any way solve the problem that Latvia has different social memories, that Latvia has different historical ideas, but the practical consequences are much more far-reaching for our ethnic relations here in Latvia, ”says Kaprāns.

–

It should be mentioned that in recent weeks, after the monument has been painted with the yellow-blue colors of the Ukrainian flag, the Night Watch of the monument has become more active, in which one of the most visible participants is the Russian nationalist Yevgeny Osipov.

Related news

Opinions in the coalition differ on the issue of the monument in the Victory Park

–

–
–

An exhibition on the daily life of the Ukrainian war will be held in the Victory Park in Riga

–

–
–

VIDEO: Domestic activists clean the Victory Monument, conflict with passers-by breaks out

–

–
–
–
–

The Ministry of Justice must offer its solutions for the dismantling of the monument by 15 April.

Although the fate of the monument has not been decided yet, it is clear that there will be no such celebrations on May 9 this year. The Saeima this week banned the organization of public entertainment and festive events on May 9, while a week ago it banned the holding of events near the monuments of the Soviet army closer than 200 meters.