The new US President Donald Trump is blatantly predictable in many of his actions. According to the logic of power, one of his first acts upon taking office is to eliminate political opponents from important positions and publicly ridicule them, even to the point of imprisonment. This is part of the explanation why Trump has repealed gender-based regulations, attacked climate rescue, deported illegal immigrants, and publicly fired many civil servants. These themes and people were the hallmarks of the Democratic Party.
Model trials against immigrants
A few days ago, four Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in combat gear and armed with M15 assault rifles searched an apartment building in California for two Venezuelans who were legal residents with temporary protected status until Trump changed the rules and made them illegal.
Similar ICE raids took place in Chicago and Boston. According to CNN, the personnel were dressed in costumes designed for television scenes. Such a trick confirms the “performative” aspect of these actions. Trump has ordered ICE to increase the number of raids and deportations, conducting from a few hundred to 1,500 checks per day. Arithmetically – more than 400,000 per year. The administration of his predecessor, Joe Biden, deported almost 300,000 migrants in 2024, but did without such “attractive style” tricks.
ICE raids give Trump an important advantage – they humiliate Democratic officials who promised to support such immigrants and reduce the Democratic Party’s voter base. It can only be added that immigrants will also be brought in to drive down labor costs in American companies – this is a classic class struggle that, as we know, is escalating.
US Sustainability Strategy
In turn, the decisions against the climate agenda have as many as three logics. First, the climate agenda was driven by Trump’s political opponents (and not his sponsors). Second, such a decision is dictated by the need to develop business – to create energy in huge quantities for the needs of artificial intelligence and to help their sponsors from the fossil sector. Third, in accordance with the basic principle of their foreign policy, Americans do not join international organizations where they do not have veto rights and others could decide for them.
Without deciding to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, Trump canceled the billion-dollar US International Climate Change Financing Plan. It was supposed to help other countries respond to the impacts of climate change. However, the US government is in a tragic situation with a lack of money, a debt burden, and the risk of de-dollarization. In addition, the laws of power make it clear that public money does not go to the wrong people and countries, as has happened massively in the US.
He ordered government agencies to “immediately pause” and review spending through the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, two key Biden-era laws. The administration clarified that the pause only applies to energy, renewable energy and electric vehicles.
Trump declared the first-ever energy emergency. The order prioritizes fossil fuels, hydropower, biofuels and nuclear power. It gives government agencies more discretion to “ignore or reduce the environmental impact” of specific energy projects.
The US president has suspended approvals for some wind and solar projects, as well as permits for new offshore wind farms. He has lifted President Biden’s ban on new liquefied natural gas export licenses and environmental justice orders. He has eliminated the American Climate Corps, a government program that was designed to employ young people in climate change jobs.
All these already canceled “measures” prevent the Americans from being a world leader in energy. President Trump included the goal of US “dominance” in energy in his December 2017 National Security Strategy. Dominating the world in energy – for the Americans, it is part of maintaining their hegemony. So – part of the US sustainability strategy.
Trump and Latvia’s long journey into the dunes
Like every company, every country has its own “road to sustainability.” Trump has a long agenda in this direction, and perhaps Latvia has one too, although there is no reliable information. It should include both emission reduction or decarbonization and other important topics.
Needless to say, if Trump is forced and can afford to build on a fossil-based foundation, then such a recipe is unlikely to work for Latvia and is unlikely to be available to us at all. Therefore, slogans about energy independence, local renewable resource production, and fewer emissions still seem quite appropriate and correct.
Latvia’s sustainable development in terms of emissions is contradictory – there is progress in some sectors, but in others the country lags significantly behind its neighbors, including the European Union’s (EU) climate or emissions targets, which at least for now have not been canceled. This was elegantly demonstrated by the results of the recent talks, in which the President of the European Commission met with car manufacturers. The agreement is to maintain the emissions targets, with manufacturers wanting fewer penalties for themselves and more European fund subsidies for zero-emission car buyers and infrastructure development. Nothing strengthens confidence in reducing emissions like the number of euros in your account.
Towards energy independence and local resources
Decarbonization is neither the first nor the only area in which Latvia is a leader among the slowest. However, in the last couple of years, there has been a positive swing both as a result of pressure from Europe and some businesses, and also because there is a separate governing body – the Ministry of Climate and Energy.
Solar energy is one of the most successful examples. The state is actively issuing permits for the development of solar parks, and this segment is growing rapidly.
Meanwhile, in the field of wind energy, the situation is the opposite – while Lithuania and Estonia have made significant progress with wind farms, Latvia is still without any real investment in this sector.
The transport sector is a particular example due to the heavy legacy of the old car fleet. Although the number of electric cars and the charging network are growing rapidly, a part of the population lives in apartment buildings, which makes the transition to electric propulsion difficult, as it is difficult to install charging infrastructure near these buildings due to complex land ownership rights.
The entry of zero-emission trucks into the market poses another challenge – subsidies for cars and charging infrastructure are needed to ensure the development of such a vehicle category.
In the electricity sector, there is progress with the desynchronization project, which aims to disconnect Latvia’s energy system from Russia and Belarus. This initiative is important for strengthening energy independence, now we just have to wait for attractive price dynamics for the consumer.
Latvia has established a legal framework for energy communities that allows them to engage in renewable energy production, sharing resources and benefiting from collective energy use. The practical implementation of this initiative is at an early stage.
The exploitation of Latvia’s hydrogen energy potential is in the planning stage. The EU is funding the development of hydrogen technologies, and Latvia has the potential to become a hydrogen exporter through its ports. A sustained political will and a clear business strategy are needed to realise the potential.
Why reduce emissions?
After the “stagnation” caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, emissions per capita are increasing. The country’s decarbonization instruments are relatively weak, as evidenced by the Information Report on Emissions Inventory approved by the Cabinet of Ministers last year. In it, the government acknowledges that Latvia is not sufficiently reducing emissions.
The government is often criticized for not having a plan for which business sectors should reduce emissions and to what extent. However, the importance of such criticism should not be exaggerated, as such a plan would have to be guided by hundreds of different variable parameters. These would include, for example, the actions of US President Trump, the oil policies of Arab countries, the actions of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, fluctuations in the value of the euro, and countless other factors. But, of course, discussing such strategies and plans allows us to enjoy longevity in coexistence, both in fine Riga castles with fine snacks and in rural huts with not so sustainable snacks.
In addition, the government has already adopted the National Energy and Climate Plan, which serves as a relatively detailed action document and has also been positively assessed by the European Commission. It needs to be improved to be suitable for both the near and medium future.
The realpolitik experience of the last four years shows that the government is neither administratively nor politically able to delegate specific emission reduction targets to sectors.
If we recognize that we live in a European Union member state – which is administratively bureaucratic, not with a somewhat free market economy – then such goals can probably be delegated “from above”, from the government. But even then, the competitiveness of sectors should still be taken into account – precisely in the light of sustainability.
The climate minister rightly emphasizes the benefits of emissions reduction targets for local producers. In doing so, he reminds us all once again of the age-old question of the wisest nation: “Saving the climate is cool, but where’s my broth?”
If Trump is solving his task – to maintain US hegemony and recover investments from sponsors from the fossil sector – then the Latvian leadership must choose stones whose lifting will not make it difficult for it to bear.
Latvian business depends on “Evika spam”
The list of energy and sustainability fragments can be continued, but we must keep the whole forest in sight for these trees – how do we maintain business competitiveness? If the clients of our companies in other countries expect so-called “sustainability certificates”, then there is only one question: can we present them and retain customers – or can’t we? Either the state makes its decisions quickly enough and thus helps business competitiveness, or it doesn’t. If the actions of the state leadership are picking up speed, then it needs to be increased. Our business risks falling out of supply chains abroad.
In this context, the opinions of relevant politicians and “experts” about the need for and inability to reduce emissions would not be of much importance.
In Poland, for example, in the heat of the election, Karol Nawrocki, the presidential candidate, promised to hold a referendum on the European Green Deal if he wins the May 18 elections. However, this is nothing more than a voter-attracting ploy.
For now, some politicians in Latvia are proving to themselves that we cannot meet climate goals, and this is normal political complacency. However, this is already a debate from the day before yesterday – the music has long since ended, but they continue to dance.
For at least a year now, the EU leadership has been raising a different slogan, putting business competitiveness at the center – leaving climate goals in the second and third place and redefining them from an end in themselves to an instrument. This is somewhat understandable logic. The new European Commission is talking about a “clean industry pact”, not a green course: the priority will be to finance/subsidize stronger competitiveness of the national economy – including so that business has fewer emissions.
Perhaps our charming Prime Minister Evika Siliņa should look in her computer’s “spam” again – which, as we know, she rarely does. There should be an “email” there from Urzula, who lives in Brussels, with exactly this content, and it should not be inadvertently deleted, but decisively put to use.
Armands Gūtmanis
Article published on ir.lv: Trump – a sign of equality for climate and LGBT • IR.lv