Main narratives:
- “Gender Ideology” conspiracy
- The government is destroying traditional values
- LGBTQ+ values are morally decadent
Overview:
After years of contentious debate, Latvia ratified the Istanbul Convention on November 30, 2023, with the treaty officially entering into force on May 1, 2024. However, last week the Saeima voted to withdraw from the Convention, culminating a period in which disinformation about the treaty reached unprecedented levels of intensity and popularity.
One of the most prominent false narratives has been promoted by Ainars Šlesers of the Latvia First party, who has repeatedly claimed that the Convention would allow men to enter women’s restrooms. This assertion uses nonsensical claims about the Convention. The treaty focuses specifically on combating violence against women and domestic violence, establishing legal frameworks for prevention, protection, and prosecution. By falsely linking the Convention to bathroom access and gender identity controversies, Šlesers has employed a classic disinformation tactic that exploits existing cultural anxieties to demonize an unrelated policy measure.
Šlesers has also engaged in character assassination against prominent Convention supporters. In a particularly brazen example, he attacked former Latvian President Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga, who spoke in support of the Istanbul Convention, by insinuating she might be a “Putin agent” because she had met with the Russian president during her time in office. Šlesers contrasted this with his own claim that he had “never met Putin in [his] life,” attempting to cast suspicion on a respected former head of state for engaging in what were routine diplomatic meetings. This tactic is especially manipulative in the Latvian context, where concerns about Russian influence are particularly sensitive given the country’s security situation and history.
Another strand of disinformation has involved overtly homophobic rhetoric aimed at stirring up opposition to the Convention. Rudolfs Bremanis of the New Latvians party has used slurs against LGBTQ+ individuals in his messaging against the Convention, deliberately conflating issues of sexual orientation with the treaty’s actual focus on protecting women from violence. His inflammatory language, including declarations like “Loud NO!! For pederasts – NO!” represents a calculated attempt to provoke emotional rather than rational responses and to mischaracterize the Convention as primarily concerned with LGBTQ+ rights rather than its actual purpose of combating gender-based violence.
The disinformation campaign has also included attempts to portray opposition critics as victims of orchestrated attacks. Šlesers accused his opponents of staging vandalism at his party’s bureau, claiming that protesters who placed posters critical of Latvia First near the party office were part of a coordinated campaign by Istanbul Convention supporters. This narrative positions Convention opponents as being unfairly targeted while deflecting from substantive debate about the treaty itself.
Bremanis has also promoted conspiratorial narratives suggesting that political parties supporting the Convention are engaged in betrayal of the Latvian people, asking rhetorically whether certain political figures would “sell” and “betray” Latvia through their support of the treaty. This framing casts the Convention not as a legitimate policy question open to democratic debate, but as an act of national treachery.
These disinformation narratives share common characteristics that reveal their manipulative intent. They consistently avoid engaging with the actual content of the Istanbul Convention, instead substituting emotionally charged but factually unrelated issues. They employ fear-mongering about social change, particularly around gender and sexuality. They rely on ad hominem attacks rather than substantive arguments. And they frame the debate in apocalyptic terms, suggesting that supporting the Convention represents an existential threat to Latvian values and sovereignty.
