“Make Riga Great Again? The Latvian Municipal Election Race”

Latvia’s municipal elections in Riga are illuminated by a bright star of political populism. Posing as a local Donald Trump, businessman-politician Ainārs Šlesers is, according to polls, heading for victory. His campaign is based on combating stagnation and political inertia in the country, and promises rapid economic growth—along with criticism of the West and its values. His political opponents highlight his connections with China and Russia. Regardless of the final election results, the strong support for “Latvian Trumpism” signals a deep societal desire for radical change in the country.

Latvia First!

Ainārs Šlesers has been a prominent figure in Latvian politics since the late 1990s. Throughout his public career, he has served multiple terms as a Member of Parliament, Vice Mayor of Riga, Minister of the Economy, and Minister of Transport. At the peak of his influence in the late 2000s, he was considered one of Latvia’s three most powerful oligarchs. His wealth and political clout faded around 2011, but a decade later, in 2021, he made a resounding comeback by founding the “Latvia First!” party—an explicit nod to Trump’s “America First!” slogan.

The party, a patchwork of populists from various and often ideologically contradictory niches in Latvian politics, began by opposing vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. The anti-EU, anti-Western, populist narrative of Šlesers and his party achieved moderate success: they secured 9 parliamentary seats in the 2022 elections and 1 seat in the 2024 European Parliament elections.

In the upcoming June municipal elections, Šlesers aims for victory—not nationwide, as Latvia’s political system makes that unfeasible—but in the capital, Riga. “Latvia First!” has led in the polls since spring and stands a real chance not only of winning but also of securing the position of Mayor of the capital—effectively a city-state in the Latvian context. Riga generates over 50% of the national GDP and is home to one-third of the population. A strong and effective mayor can, in practice, conduct a semi-autonomous foreign policy.

The Dubai of the North

Šlesers’ popularity is not primarily rooted in his views on the EU, global politics, or culture wars. Instead, it comes from offering simple solutions to Riga’s complex urban problems. Between 2009 and 2019, the city was governed by Nils Ušakovs of the Social Democratic “Harmony” party, representing the Russian-speaking population of Latvia. Though his administration was associated with corruption and abuse of power, the city simultaneously experienced growth. Ušakovs was removed from power following a corruption scandal, and a motley coalition of “Latvian” parties—nationalists, center-right, and liberals—took over.

The era of the so-called “Latvian parties'” rule saw prolonged stagnation. A drop in tourism—caused first by COVID-19 lockdowns and later by the decline in visitors from Russia and Belarus—along with delays in infrastructure projects, led to a noticeable decline in the quality of life. Šlesers capitalizes on these socio-economic issues, blaming the current Mayor Vilnis Ķirsis from New Unity and promising to turn the capital of Latvia into a Dubai of the North.

His key proposals include building a modern district on the banks of the Daugava River, restoring commerce and services in the Old Town, completing the disruptive infrastructure projects, and reviving tourism. His central campaign tactic is to present himself as the only real alternative to what he portrays as the incompetent rule of the current coalition. This narrative is symbolized by a campaign poster showing him next to a bulldozer clearing out cherries—a visual pun alluding to the name of the current mayor (Ķirsis means “cherry” in Latvian).

In Riga’s campaign, “Latvia First!” is trying to attract a wide range of dissatisfied voters—from vastly different groups. The party’s conservative, anti-globalist rhetoric and campaign symbols like “Make Riga Great Again” hats aim to appeal to ethnic Latvians disillusioned with the establishment. Meanwhile, social proposals—some of which are associated with left-wing urban movements (e.g., free public transport, limiting car numbers in the city center)—target, among others, lower-income voters. Finally, the campaign is run in both Latvian and Russian, a direct appeal to Russian-speaking voters whose support could be decisive for a “Latvia First!” victory.

Polls (27th May):

• Latvia First (LPV) – 22%
• The Progressives (P) – 13.50%
• National Alliance (NA) – 12.50%
• New Unity (JV) – 10.80%
• For Stability! (ST!) – 10.70%
• Sovereign Power / Alliance of Young Latvians (SV/AJ) – 7.50%
• Socialdemocratic Party “Harmony” (or just “Harmony”) (S) – 6.30%

Source: SKDS/LSM

An alliance with Russian-Speakers?

Šlesers and his party court the Russian-speaking electorate not only through bilingual messaging but also by subtly suggesting they will halt further “Latvianization” of Riga’s public space and position themselves as more tolerant toward minority issues. The capital’s electoral lists for “Latvia First!” include veterans who left the Social Democratic “Harmony” party after its decomposition in 2022—such as Andrejs Klementjevs, Sergejs Dolgopolovs, and Vladislavs Bartaševičs, the son of Aleksandrs Bartaševičs (long-term mayor of Rēzekne in eastern Latvia).

Their presence aims not only to attract their voter base but also to facilitate post-election coalitions with smaller Russian-speaking or pro-Russian parties, if they enter the Riga city council. The real political battle will begin after the elections, during coalition negotiations. Polls, trends, and public statements suggest the Riga council majority will form by one of two political blocs. On one side, there is the “Latvian parties” alliance made up of the center-right (New Unity, National Alliance), liberals, and the left (Progressives). On the other is the Russian-oligarchic bloc, led by “Latvia First!” and potentially supported by Russian-speaking and pro-Russian political parties like “Harmony,” “For Stability!” and other small parties which cross the threshold.

Both right-wing parties and Progressives rule out any possibility of cooperating with Šlesers’ party. “Latvia First!” also seems to rule out forming a coalition with any of the parties currently governing the city.

In Latvian politics, tough rhetoric about “red lines” in coalition negotiations doesn’t always hold after elections. The only real taboo for the political establishment —parties representing the ethnic Latvian-electorate— remains forming a formal alliance with Russian-speaking or pro-Russian political forces. Thus, pre-election pledges of a “cordon sanitaire” against populists may become obsolete once the votes are counted—especially if “Latvia First!” becomes a party strong enough to dictate terms or—due to complex political arithmetic—becomes essential for forming any majority coalition in the city council.

Regardless of the final outcome, one thing is clear: there is a shift in trends on the Latvian political scene. This shift is driven by growing frustration with the increasingly ineffective rule of the “New Unity” coalition across all levels of political life. The response to this stagnation is the charismatic Šlesers, whose populist offer seems to leave Latvia’s mainstream parties powerless. He is likely to lose public support when confronted with the reality of implementing his agenda. Nonetheless, the upcoming elections won’t solve Latvia’s or Riga’s problems—but they will certainly shape the political dynamics ahead of the 2026 parliamentary elections.