On top of all that has now crashed an even larger wave: the global recession. As small, open economies, the Baltic states thrive when their neighbors are booming, and wither when they slump. In the current downturn, demand for Baltic products—food, furniture, tourism—is sinking both in European markets and in Russia. That has led to stunning gdp falls in all three countries. In the first quarter of 2009 alone, gdp dropped at a 12 percent annual rate in Lithuania, 15 percent in Estonia, and 18 percent in Latvia. Forced to accept an imf-led bailout in December, Latvia is now struggling to meet its loan conditions. Public-sector salaries there were cut by at least 20 percent. Discretionary public spending is to fall 40 percent.
A third crashing tide is geopolitics. Russia looms next door to the Baltic states as a contemptuous and even hostile neighbor that has played out repeated military exercises based on the scenario of reconquest. The three Baltic states are today members of nato but often feel they are on its margins: in the alliance on paper, but lacking the contingency planning and military presence that would bolster the security guarantee provided by Article V of the nato treaty. Russia’s increasingly angry rhetoric and ominous moves may seem like empty posturing from the safety of Brussels or Washington, but from a Baltic standpoint they are threatening—and all the more so for having thus far prompted no clear Western response.
It used to be Belgium that was counted as the "cockpit of Europe”—the place where great-power interests clashed and were settled. Now it is the Baltic states. At stake is not just nato’s credibility, but also that of the whole post-communist experiment: Is it possible for small countries on Russia’s borders to gain durable prosperity, security, and freedom, with their destiny determined by their own talents and virtues? Or will the ebb and flow of economic fortune ultimately prove that these small states are unsustainable as anything but satrapies for more powerful neighbors?
N&J CLARK/ROBERT HARDING WORLD IMAGERY/CORBIS
PETER TURNLEY/CORBIS
ILLUSTRATION BY KATHERINE YESTER
Edward Lucas is a senior writer at The Economist and author of The New Cold War: Putin's Russia and the Threat to the West.
As an American writer and journalist, living in the Baltic region (4 years in Estonia and 10 in Latvia), I applaud Edward Lucas for this article. It is, by far, the most objective and balanced piece I have read—to date—written by an outside observer.
I have been chanting almost everything Lucas says, for years. But he also gave me a new perspective on one issue: I believed that the corrupt (beyond belief) politicians knew, full well, they were running Latvia onto the rocks; but wanted to greedily fill their coffers, prior to the great shipwreck. I can now appreciate the possibility that they were busy patting themselves on the backs for the great job they were doing—in absolute denial about the unsustainable 'foundation' of their economy—and thusly were entitled to their kickbacks, bribes and illegal shenanigans.
I also agree with Lucas assessment of Estonia being enviable to others in this part of the world. Things were done out of ignorance in Estonia, that, in hind-sight, I'm sure they regret and are paying the price for; this was to be expected in an emerging capitalism/democracy. But the corruption and apparent lack of common sense that exists in Latvia is almost palpable when you cross the border from Estonia.
I also am impressed with Lucas sensitivity to the continued strained relations between the Baltics and Russia and the reasons behind the alliance between Baltics and Nazis, in an attempt to deter Stalin. This is so often painted as a flat black and white picture rather than the highly complex situation that is was, and continues to be.
(1)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE