Latvia holds elections to the Saeima every four years, but the country’s government changes much more frequently. Since 1990, Latvia has had 13 governments, an average of one every year and a half, or so.

These governments have fallen for any number of reasons. For one, this is the nature of the parliamentary beast. Latvian politics, like many of Europe’s parliamentary governments, is a patchwork of political parties, unions, and coalitions. Shifting alliances and party disagreements can bring down governments and elevate new leaders.

Latvia’s transition to democracy has also made governments particularly unstable. Corruption and the public’s lack of trust in government leave some leaders vulnerable. For example, Aigars Kalvītis was forced to resign after suspiciously firing Aleksejs Loskutovs, the government’s corruption watchdog. Crises sometimes force a government’s resignation. Ivars Godmanis and his cabinet resigned in early 2009 because of the financial crisis that wrecked Latvia’s economy.

Yet through all the instability of the last 20 years, all of Latvia’s governments have been politically right or center-right. Thus, new polls that show the center-left Harmony Center Party leading in public opinion are shocking, but not entirely unexpected.

Parliamentary elections are scheduled for October, and Harmony Center could be a big contender. If Harmony Center can win enough seats and form a coalition, it would be the first center-left government of Latvia.

Could this be a signal of a big change for Latvia?

Before rushing to conclusions about the rise of the left in Latvia, remember that the financial crisis has forced government party changes around the world. Still four months before the election in June, pundits predict Gordon Brown, the United Kingdom’s Labour Party prime minister, will lose his election to the opposition Conservative leader David Cameron. Likewise, Germany’s chancellor, Angela Merkel, won re-election with her Christian Democrats, but shook up her ruling coalition. She dropped her old partner, the Social Democrats, and teamed up with the center-left Free Democrats instead.

Where elections were not held, several other governments fell and had to be re-constituted in part because of the financial crisis, such as in Latvia, Iceland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. Public opinion has turned on the governments in power at the onset of the financial crisis. Thus, in the first election opportunity, voters across Europe are eager to vote those politicians out.

In Latvia, then, the support for the left is equally a rejection of the right. The polls may be capturing a snapshot of public anger, not an ideological shift.The right also looks divided, which helps the left. A vote over the financial bailout negotiations with the IMF and EU revealed disagreements in the ruling coalition.

Some parties, such as the People’s Party, used the vote to separate themselves in advance of the upcoming elections. It was the right trying to outmaneuver the right.

But Latvia’s right is not down-and-out. The parties are regrouping.

Harmony Center’s biggest contender could be the new Unity Coalition. The Unity Coalition comprises the Civic Union, New Era, and Society for Different Politics parties. They might shake up the election by putting forth a fresh face: Sarmīte Ēlerte, the former editor-in-chief of the Diena newspaper.

Harmony Center lacks a leader. Some pundits had hoped Inguna Sudraba, Latvia’s auditor general, would run for a Seima seat under Harmony, believing she would have a chance at prime minister. But Sudraba ruled out running, with Harmony or Unity, entirely.

Harmony also does not have a solid foundation, such as a strong voter base and experience in power. Thus, parties on the right might be able to win after all. They are flexible enough from their past experiences in rapidly changing governments that they just might survive this blip as well.

The left will have to fight for a win. A move to the left would be beneficial for Latvia, though. Their winning could go far in restoring trust in the government. Opposition parties in democracies often keep the ruling parties honest by threatening to take over if they misstep.

In Latvia, organized left opposition has long been missing. Thus, ruling parties on the right have not made significant progress in tackling corruption, for example, because they have not feared losing power. The left will have the opportunity to showcase to the public an alternative way of doing business, so the right will finally be held accountable.

If the left succeeds in steering the government competently, voters might think about government more favorably. They may actually believe that a government can be trusted. Careful management of the left’s first term could be the beginning of a long-term, viable left in Latvia.

Regardless, Latvia will be served well by a change of people and ideas in government. The left will also bear a tremendous responsibility if they win. If they fail in running the government well, disillusioned Latvians will trust government even less; no party, it will seem, can run the government honestly.

The left should also be careful not to promise too much if it wins, such as eradicating corruption. Past governments, such as Einars Repše’s New Era, promised to end government corruption, but Latvian’s have not seen a significant change. If the left wins and breaks its promises, they will be no better than the right.

A center-left government probably will not do anything drastic. It must still contend with a largely right-leaning country and likely some center-right coalition partners. Further, the agenda likely will not be too ambitious for the left’s fear of losing power and the unraveling of all its progress. But some thorny issues might come to the forefront.

The left could bring up the issue of treatment of ethnic Russians. It could come down harder on corruption. If the economy improves, it might push for more government spending.

A win by the left would be a refreshing change for Latvia. Harmony Center could ride a wave of public anger against the ruling parties over the financial crisis to an election victory.

If Harmony wins the election and If it does well, then Latvian politics might be changed fundamentally. But don’t hold your breath; the right could still win or the left could govern badly. Latvian politics have let us down before.

Michael G. Dozler is a graduate student of international affairs who received a Fulbright research grant for study in Latvia.

Disclaimer:

Views expressed in the opinion section are never those of the Baltic Reports company or the website’s editorial team as a whole, but merely those of the individual writer.