Analysis: How Russia Could Attempt to Influence Latvia's Saeima Elections

An analysis based on publicly available content examines possible scenarios for how Russia could attempt to influence Latvia's Saeima elections, continuing an earlier piece on potential foreign interference. According to the author, the central narrative likely to spread through social networks and Telegram groups is the claim that the election has been "stolen."

Physical and technical interference

One modeled scenario involves simultaneous technical malfunctions at multiple polling stations, triggering evacuations and a halt in voting, possibly alongside an attack on polling stations' IT systems. Images and videos of such incidents could serve as material for disinformation, creating an impression of chaos and undermining trust in the results, even if the actual damage were minor. The analysis also suggests such a narrative could be reinforced by a person currently living abroad who publicly discusses returning to Latvia and "fighting," potentially cultivating an image as an opposition figure — whose arrest upon return could then be used as "proof" of political persecution.

Pro-Kremlin parties in parliament

A second scenario involves two pro-Kremlin parties potentially entering the Saeima as opposition. Their role would be to stall legislation related to containing Russia, supporting Ukraine, and strengthening national security, framing this as a focus on domestic economic concerns instead. They could also push populist, unworkable bills to slow down parliamentary work. The analysis further suggests representatives of such parties might give interviews to pro-Kremlin-leaning European media, presenting their views as representative of Latvian society's overall stance on Ukraine, NATO, and the EU.

The author stresses that the goal of pro-Kremlin forces is not to win elections outright but to create a sustained atmosphere of instability and division, exploiting public fatigue and short memory. The author identifies critical thinking and the ability to distinguish real problems from artificially inflated narratives as the main defense against such tactics.