stepping down, but not giving up
In the small Baltic nation of Latvia, a government has fallen not over ideology or scandal, but over the contested boundary between security and solidarity. Prime Minister Evika Siliņa, having dismissed her defence minister for failing to prevent Ukrainian drones from crossing into Latvian airspace, found her coalition partner unwilling to follow her — and with that refusal, her parliamentary majority dissolved. The episode is a reminder that in fragile coalitions, even a decision made in the name of national safety can become the instrument of political unraveling. Latvia now enters a period of interim governance, its October elections suddenly weighted with new consequence.
- Ukrainian drones straying from Russian territory had been breaching Latvian airspace since March, and when two exploded at an oil storage facility on May 7, the political pressure on the government became unbearable.
- Siliņa moved decisively, demanding and receiving the resignation of Defence Minister Sprūds — but her coalition partner, the Progressives, saw the firing of their own member as a provocation they could not absorb.
- By withdrawing their support over her choice of replacement, the Progressives stripped Siliņa of her parliamentary majority overnight, leaving her with no viable path to govern.
- Siliņa announced her resignation Thursday morning, but her parting words — 'stepping down, but not giving up' — signaled that she intends to reenter the arena ahead of October's elections.
- President Rinkēvičs moved swiftly to contain the damage, calling party leaders to meet Friday and warning that Latvia 'cannot afford political uncertainty and instability' as an interim government takes shape.
Latvia's centre-right prime minister Evika Siliņa resigned on Thursday, bringing down her coalition government months before parliamentary elections scheduled for October. The collapse traced back to a security crisis that had been accumulating since March, when Ukrainian drones — suspected to have strayed from Russian territory — began repeatedly crossing into Latvian airspace. The situation reached a breaking point on May 7, when two drones exploded at an oil storage facility. Siliņa concluded that her defence minister, Andris Sprūds, had failed to protect the country, and on Sunday she demanded his resignation.
Sprūds stepped down, but the trouble was that he belonged to the Progressives — Siliņa's left-leaning coalition partner. When she named a replacement the Progressives did not approve of, they withdrew their support entirely, stripping her of her parliamentary majority. With no viable government remaining, Siliņa announced her resignation Thursday morning. Her language, however, was pointed: she described herself as 'stepping down, but not giving up,' a phrase widely read as a signal of her intentions ahead of October's vote. From her perspective, she had acted decisively on a matter of national security, and her coalition partner's refusal to back her had made governing impossible.
President Edgars Rinkēvičs moved quickly to stabilize the situation, announcing he would meet with all parliamentary party leaders on Friday to explore forming an interim government. The drone incidents themselves have exposed broader vulnerabilities in Baltic air defences, with Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia all experiencing incursions since March. The army's failure to detect the drones that struck the oil facility deepened public unease about the country's security apparatus. Latvia now enters a period of caretaker governance, with the real political reckoning deferred until autumn — and Siliņa, for her part, appears to be already preparing for it.
Evika Siliņa, Latvia's centre-right prime minister, announced her resignation on Thursday morning, bringing down her coalition government months before parliamentary elections scheduled for October. The collapse came after her left-leaning coalition partner, the Progressives party, withdrew its support over a decision she had made the previous day: firing defence minister Andris Sprūds, who was himself a member of the Progressives.
The chain of events began with a security failure that had been building for weeks. Since March, Ukrainian drones—suspected to have strayed from Russian territory—had repeatedly crossed into Latvian airspace. The incidents accumulated through the spring, but the situation reached a breaking point on May 7, when two drones exploded at an oil storage facility. Siliņa saw this as the final proof that her defence minister had failed to protect the country. She said the incident "clearly demonstrates that the political leadership of the defence sector has failed to fulfil its promise of safe skies over our country." On Sunday, she demanded Sprūds's resignation, citing his failure to oversee the development of anti-drone systems quickly enough and, more broadly, his loss of her trust and the public's confidence.
Sprūds stepped down as ordered. But the Progressives party, which held his seat in the coalition, refused to accept Siliņa's choice of a replacement, Raivis Melnis. By withdrawing their support, they stripped her of her parliamentary majority. Siliņa was left with no viable government. In a hastily arranged statement to the media on Thursday morning, she announced her intention to resign. Yet her language suggested this was not an ending. She said she was "stepping down, but not giving up"—a phrase observers read as a hint at her political intentions ahead of the October elections.
The resignation exposed a deeper frustration within Siliņa's camp. She characterized the Progressives' move as petty party squabbling, a refusal to back her on a matter of national security. The defence minister's failure to detect or prevent the drone incursions had become a political liability, and she had acted decisively. The coalition partner's refusal to support her dismissal of Sprūds was, from her perspective, an act of obstruction that made governing impossible.
Latvia's president, Edgars Rinkēvičs, moved quickly to manage the crisis. He announced that he would meet with leaders of all parliamentary parties on Friday to explore options for forming a new government. In a Facebook post, he emphasized that "Latvia cannot afford political uncertainty and instability." The most likely outcome is an interim government that will hold power until the October elections, allowing the country to function while the political landscape reshuffles.
The drone incidents themselves reflected a broader vulnerability in the Baltic states' defences. Numerous Ukrainian drones have strayed from Russian territory into Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia since March. Government critics in Latvia have seized on these breaches as evidence of serious gaps in the country's ability to respond to potential threats. The army's failure to detect the drones that struck the oil facility on May 7 only deepened the sense that something was fundamentally broken in the security apparatus.
Siliņa's cryptic remark about stepping down but not giving up suggests she may be positioning herself for a political comeback after the October elections. Her resignation, forced though it was, removes her from the immediate crisis and allows her to reframe the narrative: she took decisive action on a security failure, and her coalition partner's refusal to back her was the real problem. Whether voters will see it that way remains to be seen. For now, Latvia enters a period of interim governance, with the real political reckoning deferred until autumn.
Citas Notables
clearly demonstrates that the political leadership of the defence sector has failed to fulfil its promise of safe skies over our country— PM Siliņa, on the May 7 drone incident
Latvia cannot afford political uncertainty and instability— President Edgars Rinkēvičs
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did the Progressives refuse to back her on firing the defence minister? It seems like a straightforward security decision.
Because Sprūds was one of their own—a member of their party. Firing him without their consent felt like a breach of the coalition agreement. But there's more to it than party loyalty. They may have disagreed with her assessment of his performance, or they may have wanted to negotiate the terms of his departure rather than accept her unilateral decision.
So this wasn't really about the drones at all?
The drones were the trigger, but the real issue was power. Siliņa made a move that asserted her authority as prime minister, and the Progressives pushed back. In a fragile coalition, that kind of confrontation can be fatal.
What does "stepping down, but not giving up" actually mean?
It's a signal to her supporters and to voters that she's not abandoning politics. She's stepping away from the immediate crisis, but she's keeping her options open for October. It's a way of saying: this isn't over.
Will she come back?
That depends on the election results and whether her party can rebuild its standing. Right now, she's damaged by the coalition collapse, but she's also positioned herself as someone who took security seriously. The narrative could go either way.
And what happens to Latvia in the meantime?
An interim government takes over, probably led by someone from another party. The country functions, but without a full mandate. It's a holding pattern until voters decide what comes next.