The smugness not only fueled the boom, but it allowed for the dodging of decisions on issues ranging from corruption and cronyism in politics to structural economic problems. In Latvia and Lithuania particularly, politics stank. Lithuanian President Rolandas Paksas was forced out of office in 2004 amid allegations of extortion and links with Russian organized crime. Another high-ranking Lithuanian politician, Viktor Uspaskich, fled to Russia when his bookkeeper turned over evidence to the authorities of serious breaches of party finance laws. Latvia was run by a bunch of party bosses with strong business ties, irreverently dubbed the "Politburo." On repeated occasions they tried to fire the heads of autonomous public bodies, such as the chief of the anticorruption authority, who had come dangerously close to uncovering how the country was run behind the scenes.
The first clear sign of trouble came when the one big bank in the region not owned by a foreign parent, Latvia’s Parex Bank, got into difficulties in mid-2008. Parex had always been a questionable success story. In the late 1990s the bank used to advertise on Russian television with a spot showing a $1 bill and the slogan "We are closer than America." The clear implication was that Parex was a convenient means for rich Russians to get their money out of the country. Parex strongly denies that it ever broke any Latvian law, and it has never been prosecuted. However, the bank has come under intense scrutiny from international officials seeking to combat money laundering.
Parex’s weakness was that its depositors were mainly offshore and highly mobile, while its lending had mostly been to construction projects inside Latvia, many of which soured simultaneously. After depositors withdrew nearly $430 million in the course of six weeks, the bank was nationalized in November for the token price of a couple of dollars. It also received a bailout in excess of $380 million from the Latvian state and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
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