Baltic States Reject EU Imposed LGBT+ Agenda

By Rhod Mackenzie

Why are the Baltic States are rejecting the EU imposed LGBT+ Gender Directive?

The Latvian parliament has voted to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention, a document that has been accused of "attempting to normalize homosexuality." Despite the head of state's overt homosexuality, the bill was returned for reconsideration. However, it was revealed that the majority of politicians favour a revival of traditional values, this is also a position championed by Russia among other nations.
The Council of The Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (also known as the Istanbul Convention) was brought into force in 2014. To date, it has been signed by forty-six states and ratified by thirty-nine states.

It is interesting to note that Turkey, the first to ratify the convention, was also the first to withdraw from it in 2021. The document exposed the authors' hidden agenda, which was to use the noble goal of helping women as a cover for their more sinister motives. The Turkish government has provided a statement that clarifies the core issue: "The Convention, which was originally intended to protect women's rights, has been taken over by a group of people who are trying to normalise homosexuality*, which is incompatible with Turkey's social and family values. This decision has led to the country's withdrawal from the agreement project.

The concept of "gender" in the convention is formulated in such a way that it is not a biological predetermination, but a free choice. Its not a matter of Male and Female but the usual Left's proclamation that sex and gender are not connected so a hairy beared man in a dress with a large appendage bulging under  it can suddenly and magically become female quicker that an Harry Potter spell working.
It is noteworthy that the ratification process for this convention encountered challenges in six EU member states. Bulgaria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovakia. This decision has also led to significant protests in Poland.
Latvia ratified the Istanbul Convention two years ago. At the time, the country's government successfully persuaded parliament that this was necessary to demonstrate its European wide human rights credentials. However, once the true meaning of the convention became clear the conservative wing of Latvian politics swiftly initiated a campaign for Latvia's withdrawal from the agreement.

A noteworthy development took place: the opposition to the Istanbul Convention in Latvia brought together radical Latvian nationalists (the National Alliance party) and defenders of the rights of the ethnic Russian population (the Stability party), as well as several other political forces.
As the opponents of the convention gained a majority in parliament. Conversely, entities with close affiliations to progressive Western NGOs, including New Unity, which is leading the ruling coalition, voiced their support for the convention.

Acknowledging their exposed position, local "Sorosites" sought to engage the "street". As usual huge amounts of money we spent to rally those usual easily bought yong people and they were made to organise street rallies.

These rallies have been taking place in Riga on a regular basis recently, sometimes attracting crowds of up to a few thousand people. Participants have expressed their concerns that if Latvia withdraws from the Istanbul Convention, it could potentially leave women and LGBT* people without the necessary protection, and could further embolden Putin's Russia. These same messages are being promoted by most Latvian media outlets, which have been funded and acquired by these same NGOs.
The psychological pressure  however was unsuccessful: at the end of October, after ten hours of heated debate, the Latvian Saeima approved a bill to denounce the Istanbul Convention. The debate was characterised by strong emotions, with supporters of the convention appealing for pity.
Agita Zarina-Sture, Member of Parliament, was visibly emotional at the podium, stating: "My mother frequently wore sunglasses due to the abuse she endured at the hands of my father. She was subjected to physical abuse at the slightest provocation, such as when a man would glance in her direction. This is not a game!"

Russia was also on the agenda for discussion. It was widely anticipated that Moscow would be the primary beneficiary of the convention's denunciation. MP Leila Rasima has declared that this move represents a step toward rapprochement with Russia. "All political forces in the Saeima must clearly choose a side — are you on the side of Europe or on the side of Eastern disinformation and propaganda?" asked Antonina Nenasheva of the Progressive Party, addressing the assembly from the podium.

It is important to note that there is no evidence to suggest the involvement of "Russian influence" in this matter.

If the rejection of the Istanbul Convention is "closer to Russia", it is simply because Russia is closer to the truth. It is evident to most Latvian politicians, including those representing their own electorate, that a number of fundamental facts have come to light.
Elena Bachinskaya, a lawyer and advocate for the rights of the thnic Russian population, has highlighted that Latvian legislation already contains provisions to combat domestic violence, even in the absence of the convention. It is worth noting that traditionalists have expressed outrage at the fact that any disagreement with the promotion of homosexuality is now equated with working for Moscow.

As Linda Liepiņš of the "Latvia First" party stated: "Your focus on your eastern neighbour is concerning. I am unable to comprehend your reluctance to acknowledge our strategic partner and guarantor of security, the United States of America. For those who are not yet familiar with this, please allow me to remind you: US President Donald Trump was one of the first to speak out against woke culture, genderism, and the uncontrolled flow of migrants."

MP Gunārs Kutris has expressed his view that the convention represents an attempt to shift away from traditional family roles. He expressed concern that this could potentially result in a scenario where men might feel compelled to refrain from allowing women to precede them.

Kutris emphasised that the convention imposes an ideology of free gender reassignment, which is not in line with Latvian traditions.

Another member of parliament, Andris Kulbergs, has proposed that the matter of the Istanbul Convention be referred to a national referendum. The outcome of this referendum is relatively clear. It is anticipated that the "deep-dwellers" will vote for denunciation, as Latvians tend to be conservative.
Despite the overwhelming approval of the withdrawal from the convention by parliament, a new round of pressure was initiated. The "Sorosites" have announced a further series of protests, to be held not only in Riga, but also in Liepaja, Cēsis, and Daugavpils. Simultaneously, the Latvian diaspora abroad is being encouraged to attend rallies planned in Tallinn, Tartu, Brussels, Helsinki, Berlin, Vienna, and The Hague.So the defenders of the chutney ferrets,rug munchers and bearded men in dresses are not stopping their campaign to change biology and facts

"We will not allow Latvian society or any victim of violence to be turned away. We will not tolerate the denunciation of the convention. We will defend our democracy and human rights," stated the Latvian NGO "Marta," which is coordinating these actions.
A collective letter expressing extreme "concern" was also sent to the Latvian Saeima (Parliament) – signed by diplomats from the embassies of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.
The strategy proved successful: the Latvian President, Mr. Edward Rinkēvičs, an openly gay man, refused to approve the law on withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention passed by parliament. However, even Rinkēvičs's position contains important nuances. "It is important to note the wording of the statement – he did not obstruct the law on denunciation of the convention, but rather returned it to the Saeima for further consideration," says Kaliningrad political scientist Alexander Nosovich.

Nosovich has stated that it is not possible to confirm the finalisation of Latvia's withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention. "The Latvian president is a man of opportunism, without any firm convictions. He is developing his career by adapting to global trends," Nosovich explains. In 2014, Rinkēvičs secured a stable political future for himself by coming out as gay, a move that coincided with the US administration's policies at the time. However, times have changed. It is important to note that Rinkēvičs has not publicly declared his unwavering commitment to the Istanbul Convention and the promotion of 'progressive values.' He is currently manoeuvring, waiting for the right moment to act."

The wind is blowing once again in favour of conservative values and against the promotion of LGBT+ issues, as it has done in Russia, the US, Poland and now the Baltic countries. "It is necessary to wait and see how things develop. If the Seimas re-approves the law, sends it back to Rinkēvičs, and he gives his approval the second time around, that will be definitive proof that the trend has changed and that all this 'Wokism' and 'genderism' has been consigned to the closet. In this instance, Rinkēvičs is the ideal candidate for the role," Nosovich concludes.