Forum name: Latvians Online Open Forum

Topic subject: VVF in the USA

tulkojums latviešu valodā

Topic URL

http://latviansonline.com/forums/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=101&topic_id=6267

 

Posted by Peteris Cedrins, Wed Jun-07-06 03:54 PM

Just watched the live transmission of the Latvian President's address to a joint session of Congress. Nothing earthshaking, but one wouldn't expect that -- a very good speech, though.

The text of the address in Latvian translation is here --

http://www.apollo.lv/portal/news/72/articles/75884

Some background on the visit, in English, is here --

http://www.president.lv/?lng=en

Visu labu,

/P

 

 

 

Posted by Andrejs, Wed Jun-07-06 06:26 PM

Nothing earth shattering, true, but a great speech. The cynic in me, however, almost gets the feeling after reading it that its primary purpose was as an audition for the Secretary of U.N. position?

Andrejs

 

 

 

 

Posted by Peteris Cedrins, Thu Jun-08-06 05:30 AM

"A Queen upstages Her Excellency," writes Jeff Dufour in one of the few mentions of the speech (other than the VOA's) -- the Excellency being VVF, the Queen... Queen Latifah.

http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/UndertheDome/060806.html

ITAR-TASS ignores the crucial part of the remarks on Russia --

http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=9685070&PageNum=0

The VOA report --

http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-06-07-voa49.cfm

Visu labu,

/P

 

 

 

Posted by Ojars Kalnins, Thu Jun-08-06 07:02 AM

Given the general shakiness of the earth as it is, I think VVF's thoughts on global stability are shared and appreciated by many. In her speech she talked about Latvia's success in overcoming history and hardship to rejoin the world community. She then shared her thoughts about this world community from her nation's perspective. That's what leaders do when asked to speak before a Joint Session of Congress.

The speech solidified VVF's image as one of the more respected, articulate and thoughtful world leaders, and underlined the reason for her selection as Special Envoy to the UN Secretary General. It would be disingenious for her to be coy about the UN position, and as long as she is a serious candidate, it is expected that she express her views. While the US Congress won't choose the next SecGen, I'm sure last night's speech won her additional support in Washington.

Since all the 190+ foreign ambassadors in Washington attended this speech and reported it back to their governments, the US Congress has given the President of Latvia a unique platform from which to address the world.

She spoke as a Latvian, about Latvia and its people. She also spoke on behalf of the Baltic countries and Europe as a whole. It was a speech that Europe can be grateful for, the US can be thankful for and Latvia can be proud of. One can always ask for more, but that which she did give, will be valued and appreciated by all concerned.

As someone who well remembers the dark Cold War years when Latvia's name was barely whispered in the halls of Congress, I look upon last night's speech as one of the highest foreign policy achievments of any Latvian leader in our history. Only Zigfried Meierovics' success in achieving international recognition for an independent Latvia compares.

No, the world didn't shake. But many, who do try to move and shake this world did listen. It seems only appropriate that it took a Latvian woman, and mother, to get their attention.

 

 

 

 

Posted by Peteris Cedrins, Thu Jun-08-06 08:09 AM

The text of the speech in English is now available here --

http://www.president.lv/?lng=en

/P

 

 

 

Posted by Andrejs, Thu Jun-08-06 03:05 PM

Ojar,

Agree with 99% of what you wrote. The only thing I'd disagree on is that I am not sure that United States support for her candidacy is such a good thing. If she is perceived as Uncle Sam's candidate she is probably more likely to get voted against because of that than for it. Not saying that US support is a bad thing, just hoping that the target audience is much, much broader. The US is a global superpower, but not much loved by the rest of the globe which constitutes the majority of the UN.

Andrejs

 

 

 

 

Posted by Ojars Kalnins, Fri Jun-09-06 03:29 AM

I agree Andrej,

The US is like that proverbial bull in the china shop - it can do a lot of heavy lifting when necessary, but tends to scare people and even break some things in the process.

However, VVF did give a strong pitch to the small nations of the world, defending their support for multilateralism as a way to say "Look at me! I want to be heard!" The US is no big fan of multlateralism and thus (for those who read these speeches carefully) she demonstrated a readiness to challenge US positions as well. Her poke at the US Congress on the visa waiver issue is also a sign of pluckiness.

But it all comes down to Russia and China, and for now, I have no idea what their calculations are concerning the UN.

But for those of us in the business of strengthening Latvia's reputation in the world, VVF's candidacy (regardless of the ultimate outcome) is a boost for the image of this country. Her speech solidified her position as one of the world's more influential stateswomen.

PS When writing these words I keep looking over my shoulder to see when my articulately outspoken friend Mr Zagarins will rush in with indignant howls of cleverly worded outrage. So far, nothing. Maybe he didn't see the speech? He must be on vacation.

 

 

 

 

Posted by Arija, Fri Jun-09-06 11:36 AM

I love reading everyone's commentary in this post. It reminds me of a Presidential address on TV. After the President (any president) has finished his speach, the pundits get on the air and take it all apart. They analyze and digest and offer their pearls of wisdom as to what the President "really" meant to say. Nothing wrong with that. It's food for thought but in the long run, no one will ever remember these pearls. It is the speach that will be remembered and this speech will certainly go down in Latvian history.

It sure put a lump in my throat. What a great lady!

 

 

 

 

Posted by Juris Zagarins, Sun Jun-11-06 09:14 PM

< PS When writing these words I keep looking over my shoulder to see when my articulately outspoken friend Mr Zagarins will rush in with indignant howls of cleverly worded outrage. So far, nothing. Maybe he didn't see the speech? He must be on vacation.>

I get a big lump in my throat whenever I hear the Iron Lady saying that her people, of all the world's people, by virtue of their unique experience of Soviet occupation, possess a unique ability to comprehend the logic of US president G.W.Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq and that they are more willing than most to join in his War of the Willing in order to turn that obvious disaster into a historic victory for him. I got an even bigger lump in my throat when the Iron Lady claimed authority to speak for all of Europe in assuring the United States Congress that all of Europe, far from being any sort of countervailing balance against the policies of US President G.W.Bush is, in fact, as willing as she herself is to go to war for any blunder that US President G.W.Bush might choose to undertake, either past or future. (This is what she means by "multilateralism", as near as I can make out, and clearly she hopes that by chiming in with the Bush administration's flagrant bashing of international law and international institutions, she will be putting heerself personally in a position to be appointed to the high position of John Bolton's general secretary at a United Nations just as beholden to G.W.Bush & Co. as the people of Latvia and all of Europe are.)

 

 

 

 

Posted by Alana, Sun Jun-11-06 11:06 PM

Thanks, Peteris, for the English translation of this speech. 1) was it a necessary brevity? I am always in favour of short and sweet, as opposed to long, detailed and zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 2) so glad she touched on several issues in a forthright way, ie. Israel's right to exist, her straight talk to Hamas, the historical notes re: WW11 and Soviet bearhug and the price that was paid for freedom, and how freedom is something we must never take for granted 3) the Rothko family rededication of the synagogue was a nice touch (and I speak as an artist and a Jew) 4) Yes, eradication of poverty and the necessity of quality education ARE ideals, but without ideals, how can ANYTHING positive happen? Last, as a Montrealer, I wonder if the hallowed halls of academe at McGill miss Mme. VVF, but what a gift to the world....the mouse that roared....Brava p.s. did not realize Nato will convene in Riga in the fall....I learn so many things here at LOL

 

 

 

 

Posted by Arija, Mon Jun-12-06 12:23 PM

Subcommandante, You are such a cynic. Why must there be a selfish

motive behind the President's speech?

Despite the humor in your post, sarcastic as it is, I did not read anything of the sort in her speech. Besides, what's wrong with having a stronger ally?

I don't see that as being beholden to GW. She is just looking out for Latvia.

 

 

 

 

Posted by Juris Zagarins, Mon Jun-12-06 02:01 PM

If the Iron Lady were looking out for Latvia, she would be working full time to educate her people on their civic responsibilities under representative democracy, not aggrandizing herself with US President G.W.Bush by speaking for all of Europe in endorsing the Global War of the Willing.

In endorsing the war in Iraq specifically and Global War of the Willing in general, i.e. the Bush Administration's global power grab, she is endorsing the views of US President G.W.Bush's brighter bulbs, among them John Bolton, the very man she aspires to serve as general secretary at the United Nations, in his well-known opinion that "treaties are simple political acts and not legally binding" and that "the war in Iraq is an opportunity to undermine the United Nations". She is endorsing the signers of the 1997 Neoconservative Manifesto, among them Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Scooter Libby, in their proclamation that the detention of Augusto Pinochet, the International Criminal Court and the Kyoto Protocol are all "threats to American security".

I could go on but I do not want to tax your attention span. Take solace in Simple Alana's joyful ejaculation:

>> what a gift to the world....the mouse that roared...

 

 

 

 

Posted by Arija, Mon Jun-12-06 03:49 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Bolton the US Ambassador to the UN?

How is VVF going to "serve him" should she get the UN post?

He doesn't have any more clout than the Russian or Chinese Ambassador at the UN.

 

 

 

 

Posted by Peteris Cedrins, Mon Jun-12-06 04:30 PM

VVF will never become the Gensek precisely because most of the world despises what VVF as a proxy of Bolton and Dubya stands for, sorry. The Subcommandante {sic} is trying to be subtle and ironic, and he is succeeding as always. The language of her speech was steeped in outworn rhetoric. When she attempts to address reality in a practical manner, she is much less impressive.

This link is to a photo of a painting entitled "Vaira Goes to the UN," by Ilgvars Zalāns --

/P

 

 

 

 

Posted by Peteris Cedrins, Mon Jun-12-06 04:43 PM

More Vaira from Zalāns --

Anybody interested in Zalāns' work can find him easily, for instance at

http://www.galerijalaipa.lv/lat/artists_detail.php?id=2

The photographs of his VVF-oriented exhibit are from my travel pages, taken with his permission -- http://members.virtualtourist.com/m/672eb/6c29c/6/

/P

 

 

 

 

Posted by Peteris Cedrins, Mon Jun-12-06 04:49 PM

One more --

/P

 

 

 

Posted by Alana, Tue Jun-13-06 02:50 AM

I find it joyful to share, whether things, thoughts. laughs or anything that can be uplifting. It's so interesting to see the cynical intellectual takes, the questioners, the opinions shared above. VVF is a politician, one doesn't expect her to operate like a saint, or superceleb, either holy or slickly pretty/perfect. One thing may be considered: her latest appearance addressing congress puts Latvia on the map, perhaps for the first time, for some Americans. Isn't it great they see a strong, feminine woman who's fighting to improve conditions in her country? Isn't it always easy to be a Sunday morning quarterback? Or is it would-be backseat driver? I pray for our leaders to do the best they can, for strength, wisdom and to remain in power as long as they put efficacy above self-perpetuity. It's awfully easy to talk, and discuss, as we do here, but how many of us could do what we require of our "leaders"???

 

 

 

 

Posted by Juris Zagarins, Tue Jun-13-06 04:41 AM

Alana ejaculated:

< I find it joyful to share, whether things, thoughts. laughs or anything that can be uplifting.>

Excuse me for disagreeing, but I find the Iron Lady's endorsement of global war to be less than uplifting or even funny, for that matter.

< It's awfully easy to talk, and discuss, as we do here, but how many of us could do what we require of our "leaders"???>

Excuse me, but wishful thinking about the character of our leaders is not exactly good citizenship in a representative democracy. Even if you yourself cannot imagine anything but global war and our side being on G.W.Bush's side (God's side), you SHOULD expect more wisdom than that of our leaders.

Gelge W. Twigg {sic} a.k.a. El Subcommandante {sic} a.k.a. You Heathen Rabble {sic}

 

 

 

 

Posted by Ojars Kalnins, Tue Jun-13-06 07:47 AM

Thanks for chiming in Juris. But your alarum bell seems to be stuck on one note.

You claim VVF serves US interests and thus supports global war under US leadership.

But in her speech she said...""But the United States has become a world leader only to the extent that it has not been indifferent to the fates, aspirations and the opinions of other nations."

Not what I would call a ringing endorsement of Boltonism. She adds:

"No man is an island, neither is any country alone and self-sufficient. All of us, large and small, we are interlocked, intertwined and interdependent. If we want peace in the world, if we want international cooperation, persuasion is as important as imposition by force."

Strikes me as a motherly reminder to Da Superpower that we are all in this together and need to talk more before we act.

I supported the US position BEFORE the Iraqi war because I hoped that the UN would join with Washington in sending a clear signal to Hussein that the jig was up. Our Darwinian ancestors understood the value of bluster before bashing, and mankind has generally followed suit, often hoping that a stern warning could prevent conflict. But the UN backed off, and France, Germany and Russia openly opposed the US initiative, which gave Hussein all the comfort he needed in believing that it was all an empty bluff. Had Paris, Berlin and Moscow joined Washington, NY, London and Brussels in sending a clear signal to Hussein, he might have hopped a plane for Myanmar and we could have been spared a war.

I supported the threat of war because I hoped it would prevent an actual war. This didn't happen. The US went ahead anyway and is now paying the price of this failure.

Although any Latvian president has the potential to influence domestic policy, the law clearly states that among the president's chief duties is to represent the country internationally. She has done so in a superb manner. She has been rated as one of the most influential women in the world, was appointed special envoy to the UN SecGen; has been interviewed, documentaried, filmed, analyzed and featured in media around the world. I compared her earlier to Zigfrids Meierovics (who deserves a statue in the new Foreign Ministry on K. Barona street) because, like him, she has made leaders around the world aware of Latvia's existence. She is also at the top of every foreign journalists interview list when they visit Latvia. Based on my conversations with these journalists afterwards, I can say that 99% are very impressed. The same goes for foreign diplomats, political scientists and foreign policy experts I speak with.

She is now one of only a hundred or so world leaders who have addressed a Joint Session of Congress in the 230-year history of the United States. Future generations may not remember what she said, but they will remember that a Latvian said it.

A job well done, I say.

 

 

 

 

Posted by Juris Zagarins, Tue Jun-13-06 11:29 AM

< Thanks for chiming in Juris. But your alarum bell seems to be stuck on one note.>

My one note is a note of diametrical disagreement with the single note of your propaganda bell. I never said that the Iron Lady is ineffectual. I said she is wrong.

< But in her speech she said...""But the United States has become a world leader only to the extent that it has not been indifferent to the fates, aspirations and the opinions of other nations.">

<Not what I would call a ringing endorsement of Boltonism. She adds:>

I never accused our Iron Lady of endorsing American indifference, nor did I accuse John Bolton of being indifferent to the fates, aspirations, and opinions of other nations. Where did you get the idea that I might be saying that declaring and waging global war is a manifestation of indifference?

<"No man is an island, neither is any country alone and self-sufficient. All of us, large and small, we are interlocked, intertwined and interdependent. If we want peace in the world, if we want international cooperation, persuasion is as important as imposition by force.">

<Strikes me as a motherly reminder to Da Superpower that we are all in this together and need to talk more before we act.>

Strikes me as a case of blatant self-contradiction, in view of her unrepentant endorsement of global war.

< I supported the US position BEFORE the Iraqi war because I hoped that the UN would join with Washington in sending a clear signal to Hussein that the jig was up.>

The simple fact is that the great majority of states who sat on the Security Council on March 2003 were unpersuaded that the circumstances as they were known then could justify "the imposition of force", to use the Iron Lady's own term. History has clearly shown that they were right and the Bush administration and its Iron Lady were wrong. On your part, your retrospective investment of Saddam Hussein with enough intellignece to see that the "jig would have been up" if only the Security Council had seen their way to an endorsemnt of Bush's war is, to put it as kindly as I can, extremely stupid.

< I supported the threat of war because I hoped it would prevent an actual war.>

You and your Iron Lady supported and still support an actual war.

< A job well done, I say.>

Only our enemies agree with your assessment. It is only our enemies who needed this war.

 

 

 

 

Posted by Ojars Kalnins, Tue Jun-13-06 03:34 PM

Hard not to attribute some intelligence to a man who managed to keep himself in power for as long as Hussein did. Clearly enough to save his skin for a while. When Hussein felt confident he had Paris, Berlin and Moscow on his side, he sat pretty. When he realized that Washington and London were afer him, he hid in a hole in the ground. The strategy that failed, was trying to drive Hussein into that hole before bringing in the tanks. Had a unified global effort put the proper squeeze on Hussein, he might have run, a civil war would have ensued, but it would have been up to the Iraqis alone to sort out.

 

 

 

 

Posted by Juris Zagarins, Tue Jun-13-06 04:21 PM

Being in your position, I would at least google up some facts before writing serious letters in public. You would discover that you and your Iron Lady endorsed the Shock and Awe bombing, invasion and occupation of Iraq some time AFTER the G.W.Bush Administration had made it perfectly clear that it was going to go ahead with the bombing, invasion and occupation even if Saddam Hussein and his sons should try to leave the country in order save their skins. It is extremely stupid of you to argue now that the civil war we precipitated by bombing, invading and occupying Iraq could have been "left to the Iraqis to sort out" if only the Security Council of the United Nations had gone along with the Iron Lady and endorsed the bombing, invasion and occupation of Iraq.

 

 

 

 

Posted by Ojars Kalnins, Wed Jun-14-06 07:06 AM

As humans are wont to do, we too seem to have a disagreement over just what happened and why. Even recent history is subject to wide interpretation. Yours and mine fall at widely seperated points along the probability spectrum. Apparently, from where you sit (must be a lofty place)no other points appear to exist and anyone who thinks otherwise lacks your rare and wondrous species of intelligence. Could be. Could be indeed. Those of us down here in the trenches thank you for your sage advice.

But the challenge remains. How do countries best cooperate to neutralize clear threats? Before the Iraqi war, opinions on how to cooperate fell into two camps. Both the EU and NATO split along the same fault line. Latvia, like so many other new members of these two organizations, also had to choose. You, who sit in New England, like to single out the US as the one and only. (Reminds me of the old NewYorker poster.)But over here in Europe, the Old England, as well as Denmark, Spain, Italy, Netherlands and all of Latvia's earnest eastern and southern neighbors, shared their views with the powers that be in Riga. Then France and Germany weighed in, followed hard on their heels by Russia. Thus Latvia had to choose.

By routinely ignoring and diminishing the importance of these other 'willing' coalitioners and focusing all your wrath on VVF, you pay this Baltic Lady of Iron an enormous compliment. You make it sound like GWB and VVF masterminded the whole thing. And yet you question the mastery of their minds to boot. Something doesn't wash.

Then again, you also thought Hussein was stupid. Must indeed be a frustrating existence when those of lesser minds are in the positions to make all the great decisions.

As for me, I respect VVF for what she has done and never second guess Ozzie Guillen.

 

 

 

Posted by Juris Zagarins, Wed Jun-14-06 04:05 PM

< As humans are wont to do, we too seem to have a disagreement over just what happened and why.>

What you said was that you had hoped that Saddam Hussein and his sons would have left Iraq to fight out its own civil war if only the UN Security Council had gone along with the Iron Lady in endorsing the bombing, invasion and occupation of Iraq. What I said was that it is a matter of record that our Iron Lady endorsed the bombing, invasion and occupation of Iraq AFTER the Bush Administration had made it clear that the bombing, invasion and occupation of Iraq would proceed even if Saddam Hussein and his sons should try to leave Iraq in order to save their skins. Not to mention also that she committed Latvian troops to the effort with no regard for any UN resolutions, with no regard for any findings of UN inspectors and with no regard for anything other than her personal hunch, shared with, yes, various other Realpoliticians of the Coalition of the Willing, possessed of the iron determination to go against the will of their people, that it might make her popular with the Bush Administration. And that, of course, as you like to brag, it did.

< Even recent history is subject to wide interpretation. Yours and mine fall at widely seperated points along the probability spectrum. Apparently, from where you sit (must be a lofty place)no other points appear to exist and anyone who thinks otherwise lacks your rare and wondrous species of intelligence. Could be. Could be indeed. Those of us down here in the trenches thank you for your sage advice. >

Facts are facts, as much as you would like to think that your befuddlement justifies your lowly position in the stinking trenches of the war your Iron Lady endorsed.

< By routinely ignoring and diminishing the importance of these other 'willing' coalitioners and focusing all your wrath on VVF, you pay this Baltic Lady of Iron an enormous compliment. You make it sound like GWB and VVF masterminded the whole thing. And yet you question the mastery of their minds to boot.>

Excuse me for singling out the Iron Lady, but this is a Latvian forum. I do not have a high opinion of Tony Blair and the rest either.

< Something doesn't wash.>

What doesn't wash is how you can be in a position to be paid by the Republic of Latvia to polish the image of Latvia and yet this is the best you can come up with.

< Then again, you also thought Hussein was stupid.>

I said he was not so stupid as to think that the Bush Administration would not bomb, invade, and occupy Iraq unless the UN Security Council endorsed it. Unlike you, he was aware that the Bush Administration had declared that it was going to bomb, invade and occupy Iraq regardless of what the UN Security Council decided. He was, on the other hand, stupid enough to think that the Bush Administration actually believed that he had weapons of mass destruction at his disposal. Also, I do remember telling you that I think your lack of knowledge on this important matter demonstrates serious stupidity on your part.

< Must indeed be a frustrating existence when those of lesser minds are in the positions to make all the great decisions.>

No kidding.

< As for me, I respect VVF for what she has done and never second guess Ozzie Guillen.>

No kidding!

 

Kas jauns Latvijā?