Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braže and Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs clashed publicly over EU sanctions policy and the removal of Russian oligarchs Evgeny Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman from restrictive lists, exposing deep coalition friction just weeks before municipal elections in Riga.
Ministers soften mandate to share election accountability
Diena reported that while public slogans urged perseverance against Russian influence, a softened mandate was quietly carried to the Cabinet table to allow Latvian negotiators to concede on individual sanctions. The move was designed to ensure that political responsibility ahead of the elections was shared between Kulbergs, representing the electoral list Apvienotais saraksts (AS), and Braže, leading the rival Jaunā Vienotība (JV) slate in Riga. Concurrently, during a working visit to the United States, Braže openly attempted to persuade other nations to postpone the decision by two weeks until Latvia’s election and government formation period concluded.
By the evening of September 22, just hours before a compromise was struck to extend EU sanctions against approximately 2,600 individuals including Vladimir Putin for three years, Latvia abstained. This allowed France and Luxembourg to secure the removal of oligarchs Usmanov and Fridman. Ukrainian officials publicly thanked Braže for her efforts, while Kulbergs praised himself regarding French assurances about putting Latvia under its nuclear umbrella.
Rival leaders shift blame on morning news program
The fragile political truce broke down the following morning as both leaders vied for pre-election points and sought to shift accountability. Appearing on the TV3 news program “900 sekundes,” Kulbergs attempted to frame Braže as politically responsible for the negotiation process and outcome, stating that sanctions are the sole competence of the foreign minister. He expressed frustration that Latvia remained the lone holdout nation and claimed no domestic interests, particularly regarding France, were used to gain advantage during the inevitable concessions.
Hours later, Braže posted on social media that the prime minister blamed the Foreign Ministry for defending Latvia’s security interests to the end and suggested she should have agreed faster to remove the two oligarchs. According to Diena’s analysis of Kulbergs’s actual statements, the minister engaged in manipulation by attributing positions the prime minister never held. Kulbergs did not criticize the ministry for upholding veto power, but rather for poor coalition-building that left Latvia isolated at the negotiating table.
Sources told Diena that the inexperienced prime minister and his office had to be briefed during consultations that drawing out sanctions negotiations until the final hour is standard diplomatic practice. Other leaders, including the Prime Minister of Ireland as the EU presiding country, reportedly criticized Latvia’s isolated stance in phone calls to the foreign service. Braže used this messaging gap to position herself as a principled fighter defending her ministry's work.
Coalition friction exposes deep cooperation breakdown during crisis
Internal complaints from Kulbergs’s circle point to a complete breakdown in cooperation during the crisis. AS officials raised objections over how Braže’s team prepared the list of Latvian defense interests submitted to French President Emmanuel Macron’s office. Long-standing partisan friction also played a role, with JV members allegedly treating AS figures as novices who lack foreign policy expertise.
Government insiders explained to Diena that Braže insisted on a formal Cabinet-approved mandate this time to prevent all political fallout from resting solely on her shoulders if the compromise leaked early. Previous sanctions adjustments had bypassed the need for a new government mandate under the baseline policy that individual lists could be expanded but not shortened. By forcing the Cabinet to formally adopt an abstention position on Usmanov and Fridman while subjecting them to national sanctions instead, Braže ensured JV shared political ownership with its coalition partners.
Frequently Asked Questions About the Sanctions Dispute
Why were Evgeny Usmanov and Mikhail Fridman removed from the EU sanctions list?
France and Luxembourg pushed for the removal of the two Russian oligarchs during negotiations on extending EU-wide restrictive measures. Latvia ultimately abstained from the vote rather than issuing a veto, allowing the broader sanctions package against roughly 2,600 individuals to be extended for three years.
What specific role did Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs play in the negotiations?
Kulbergs intervened late in the diplomatic process as the Cabinet approved a softened mandate allowing Latvia to abstain. He later publicly criticized the Foreign Ministry for isolating Latvia as the final holdout without securing bilateral concessions from major EU partners like France.
How did Foreign Minister Baiba Braže respond to the Prime Minister’s remarks?
Braže used social media to accuse Kulbergs of criticizing the Foreign Ministry for defending national security and suggesting Latvia should have conceded faster. Diena reported that her characterization manipulated Kulbergs’s actual statements regarding negotiation strategy.
What national measures did Latvia take following the EU exemption?
Following the decision to remove the oligarchs from the European Union sanctions list, Latvia subjected both individuals to national-level sanctions.