Latvian parliamentarian warns against dropping Belarusian media content

The pos­si­ble clo­sure of the Belaru­sian divi­sion of the LSM+ Lat­vian media out­let has sparked wide­spread con­cern not only among the Belaru­sian dias­po­ra in Latvia. BAJ looked into the issue and spoke with Lat­vian MP Leila Rasi­ma, as well as with com­mu­ni­ty rep­re­sen­ta­tives and the Unit­ed Tran­si­tion­al Cab­i­net of Belarus.

Screen­shot from bel.lsm.lv

Latvia’s pub­lic media (LSM — Latvi­jas Sabiedriskais medi­js) announced its strate­gic devel­op­ment plans for 2026–2029. Accord­ing to the doc­u­ment, start­ing in 2026, LSM will shift to broad­cast­ing in four lan­guages: Lat­vian, Eng­lish, Ukrain­ian, and Russ­ian. Belaru­sian and Pol­ish (cur­rent­ly still avail­able as sep­a­rate lan­guage ver­sions of the web­site) are not men­tioned at all. Does this mean that the Belaru­sian-lan­guage site under LSM, just launched in July 2023, will cease to exist?

Radzivon Biahliak: Closing the Belarusian division of LSM+ could affect Latvia’s information security

The LSM deci­sion has caused a strong pub­lic reac­tion, espe­cial­ly among the Belaru­sian com­mu­ni­ty in Latvia, which num­bers over 50,000 peo­ple. The first to sound the alarm was the Asso­ci­a­tion of Belaru­sians in Latvia “Supol­ka,” cre­at­ed at the height of the 2020 Belaru­sian upris­ing.

Radzivon Biahli­ak. Cour­tesy pho­to

Radzivon Biahli­ak, Supol­ka chair­man, told BAJ about the sit­u­a­tion sur­round­ing the Belaru­sian ver­sion of LSM+.

Accord­ing to the strate­gic pri­or­i­ties approved by LSM man­age­ment for 2026–2029, the reform aims to tran­si­tion to a sin­gle dig­i­tal plat­form. All TV and radio con­tent will be in Lat­vian. At the same time, all for­eign-lan­guage mate­ri­als will be avail­able exclu­sive­ly in dig­i­tal for­mat on LSM.lv.

The con­cept spec­i­fies Lat­vian as the pri­ma­ry lan­guage on the web­site, with select­ed arti­cles trans­lat­ed into Russ­ian, Ukrain­ian, and Eng­lish. Belaru­sian and Pol­ish are not men­tioned, mean­ing these web­site sec­tions will be shut down. LSM man­age­men­t’s offi­cial posi­tion is that the reform is nec­es­sary to opti­mize costs and cre­ate a media more focused on pro­mot­ing Lat­vian con­tent and lan­guage.

“But in prac­tice, if we ana­lyze the actu­al work of the Belaru­sian divi­sion, it becomes clear that this deci­sion could have neg­a­tive con­se­quences. Clos­ing a pop­u­lar media out­let in the native lan­guage is a severe blow to our eth­nic com­mu­ni­ty.

This is not just the loss of a news source — it threat­ens the preser­va­tion of Belaru­sian iden­ti­ty and cul­ture. With­out such a plat­form, the voic­es of the Belaru­sian demo­c­ra­t­ic dias­po­ra will be drowned out in the larg­er Russ­ian-speak­ing infor­ma­tion space,” said Biahli­ak.

Anoth­er cru­cial point often over­looked is the unique val­ue of the Belaru­sian edi­to­r­i­al team, which goes beyond inform­ing the dias­po­ra.

“Jour­nal­ists forced to leave Belarus pro­duce accu­rate and in-depth report­ing for the broad­er Lat­vian audi­ence. Although the num­ber of direct read­ers of the Belaru­sian ver­sion of LSM+ from Latvia is lim­it­ed, data show that arti­cles cre­at­ed by Belaru­sian jour­nal­ists, once trans­lat­ed into Lat­vian and Russ­ian, receive tens of thou­sands of views. This proves that the news­room is an impor­tant source of infor­ma­tion for a wide LSM audi­ence, not just for the Belaru­sian-speak­ing minor­i­ty,” not­ed Biahli­ak.

There is also a crit­i­cal aspect direct­ly tied to Latvia’s nation­al inter­ests.

“What rais­es spe­cial con­cern is the impact of this deci­sion on Latvia’s infor­ma­tion secu­ri­ty. Jour­nal­ists forced to flee Belarus have unique exper­tise in cov­er­ing events and coun­ter­ing dis­in­for­ma­tion spread by the Lukashen­ka regime. This is cru­cial, giv­en the results of a recent sur­vey com­mis­sioned by LSM itself: 39% of Lat­vians do not view the Belaru­sian dic­ta­tor­ship neg­a­tive­ly (choos­ing either a pos­i­tive view or ‘hard to say’). Among Russ­ian-speak­ers, that fig­ure is 83%.

In this con­text, clos­ing the edi­to­r­i­al office is seen as a step that weak­ens one of the few reli­able infor­ma­tion chan­nels capa­ble of coun­ter­ing pro­pa­gan­da and sup­port­ing Belaru­sians’ demo­c­ra­t­ic aspi­ra­tions.”

The Asso­ci­a­tion of Belaru­sians in Latvia “Supol­ka” and the Ita Koza­ke­viča Lat­vian Asso­ci­a­tion of Nation­al Cul­tur­al Soci­eties appealed to mem­bers of the par­lia­men­tary group “For a demo­c­ra­t­ic Belarus” in the Lat­vian Saeima, urg­ing them to help pre­serve the Belaru­sian-lan­guage divi­sion of LSM+.

There is a his­tor­i­cal prece­dent: dur­ing the First Lat­vian Repub­lic, the well-known Lat­vian poet Jānis Pliekšāns (Rai­nis), both as a Saeima deputy and as Min­is­ter of Edu­ca­tion, active­ly sup­port­ed the cre­ation of Belaru­sian edu­ca­tion­al insti­tu­tions, rec­og­niz­ing that strength­en­ing Belaru­sian nation­al iden­ti­ty was key to break­ing free from Russ­ian influ­ence.

Today, Lat­vian par­lia­men­tar­i­ans bear respon­si­bil­i­ty for con­tin­u­ing this his­tor­i­cal line. They can help by rais­ing the issue in rel­e­vant com­mit­tees, such as the Saeima’s Human Rights and Pub­lic Affairs Com­mit­tee, and urg­ing the lead­er­ship of LSM and SEPLP to revise their deci­sion.

“To dis­cuss this issue, we are ready for dia­logue and pro­pose orga­niz­ing a meet­ing with rep­re­sen­ta­tives of the Coun­cil for Pub­lic Elec­tron­ic Media (SEPLP), LSM, the Saeima Human Rights and Pub­lic Affairs Com­mit­tee, the par­lia­men­tary group “For a demo­c­ra­t­ic Belarus,” and the Lat­vian MFA’s spe­cial envoy to the Belaru­sian demo­c­ra­t­ic forces,” said Biahli­ak.

In addi­tion, Supol­ka appealed to pro­fes­sion­al jour­nal­ist asso­ci­a­tions — both Belaru­sian and Euro­pean — to sup­port the Belaru­sian divi­sion of LSM+. Sup­port “not only as a sym­bol of a peo­ple still fight­ing for their rights, but also as a defense of the prin­ci­ple of cul­tur­al diver­si­ty. This is not only about media, but also about the val­ues we must defend.”

At Supolka’s ini­tia­tive, the Office of Demo­c­ra­t­ic Forces of Belarus and the Unit­ed Tran­si­tion­al Cabinet’s rep­re­sen­ta­tives for Nation­al Revival also came for­ward in sup­port of the Belaru­sian sec­tion at LSM+.

Pavel Barkouski: Russian propaganda could replace the Belarusian LSM division

Pavel Bark­ous­ki, the Unit­ed Tran­si­tion­al Cabinet’s Rep­re­sen­ta­tive for Nation­al Revival, also com­ment­ed on the issue.

Pavel Bark­ous­ki. Pho­to: Euro­ra­dio

“The Belaru­sian divi­sion of Latvia’s Pub­lic Media was estab­lished in July 2023. It was an excep­tion­al project and a suc­cess­ful exam­ple of coop­er­a­tion between media pro­fes­sion­als of dif­fer­ent nations.

The cre­ation of an inde­pen­dent Belaru­sian-lan­guage infor­ma­tion chan­nel for res­i­dents of Latvia and the bor­der regions of Belarus was not only an effec­tive tool for coun­ter­ing dis­in­for­ma­tion and pro­pa­gan­da spread in Russ­ian across the region, but also a reli­able means of pre­serv­ing and strength­en­ing Belaru­sians’ nation­al iden­ti­ty.

Its appear­ance on one of Latvi­a’s major pub­lic media plat­forms was a mean­ing­ful sym­bol­ic ges­ture of sup­port for Belaru­sians’ strug­gle for democ­ra­cy and inde­pen­dence, a source of hope that our val­ues align with Euro­pean nations ready to wel­come Belaru­sians into their fam­i­ly in the future.

By con­tribut­ing to the fight against dis­in­for­ma­tion and work­ing for region­al secu­ri­ty, this media out­let also served as a bar­ri­er against fur­ther Rus­sian­iza­tion of Belaru­sians. Many who are forced to stay in Latvia can­not yet ful­ly inte­grate into the local infor­ma­tion space, and may mis­tak­en­ly turn to biased Russ­ian-lan­guage sources. If Belaru­sian voic­es are silenced and the Belaru­sian divi­sion of LSM+ can­not con­tin­ue its work, it will deal a severe blow to sol­i­dar­i­ty — and mark a vic­to­ry for Russ­ian pro­pa­gan­da, which could then become the pri­ma­ry source of news for Belaru­sians in the region.”

Leila Rasima: “We Must Not Lose This Valuable Resource”

Leila Rasi­ma, an MP from The Pro­gres­sives Par­ty in the Lat­vian Saeima, shared her per­spec­tive with BAJ on the pos­si­ble clo­sure of the Belaru­sian divi­sion of LSM+. After the parliament’s recess, she plans to con­vene a meet­ing of the Saeima Human Rights Com­mit­tee and, togeth­er with LSM and the Coun­cil for Pub­lic Elec­tron­ic Media (SEPLP), hold hear­ings on the issue.

Leila Rasi­ma. Pho­to: flickr.com/Ieva Ābele, Saeima/CC BY-SA 2.0 DEED

What is the pri­ma­ry goal of the LSM reform?

“The goal is to stop the divi­sion of the infor­ma­tion space in Latvia – between Lat­vian and Russ­ian speak­ing audi­ences, and to ensure that in the future Lat­vian pub­lic media, both TV and radio, pro­vide con­tent only in the state lan­guage. There­fore, start­ing from 2026, it is planned to switch Lat­vian Radio broad­casts to only the state lan­guage by shut­ting down the LR4 chan­nel. Mean­while, LTV con­tent is already pro­vid­ed exclu­sive­ly in Lat­vian.”

LSM man­age­ment plans to shut down the Belaru­sian-lan­guage ver­sion of the site start­ing in 2026. Why was this deci­sion made?

“Along­side the deci­sion to pro­vide con­tent on Lat­vian TV and radio only in the state lan­guage, oth­er changes are also planned to strength­en and improve the effi­cien­cy of Latvi­a’s pub­lic media. This includes restruc­tur­ing the edi­to­r­i­al teams with­in the LSM.LV online plat­form.

The LSM.LV edi­to­r­i­al team, which cur­rent­ly cre­ates and pub­lish­es dig­i­tal con­tent in the Lat­vian lan­guage, will be joined by the LSM+ (his­tor­i­cal­ly rus.lsm) edi­to­r­i­al team, which present­ly pro­duces con­tent in var­i­ous minor­i­ty lan­guages, but pre­dom­i­nant­ly in Russ­ian. As a result, the LSM+ edi­to­r­i­al team will no longer exist in its cur­rent form and will be inte­grat­ed into the main LSM edi­to­r­i­al team. Going for­ward, con­tent cre­ation will be car­ried out joint­ly with­in a sin­gle edi­to­r­i­al struc­ture.

Although the strate­gic pri­or­i­ties pre­pared by the LSM Board for 2026 — 2029 state that con­tent on TV, radio, and dig­i­tal plat­forms will pri­mar­i­ly be in Lat­vian, there are no plans to aban­don con­tent in oth­er lan­guages com­plete­ly. The strate­gic pri­or­i­ties men­tion three lan­guages — Eng­lish, Russ­ian and Ukrain­ian. How­ev­er, in response to objec­tions from Pol­ish and Belaru­sian orga­ni­za­tions about the need to main­tain con­tent in Pol­ish and Belaru­sian, the LSM Board will work to find solu­tions to meet the needs of these com­mu­ni­ties as well.” 

The Belaru­sian ver­sion of LSM has become one of the loud­est voic­es of the Belaru­sian dias­po­ra in Latvia. Sto­ries are cre­at­ed by Belaru­sian jour­nal­ists who fled polit­i­cal repres­sion. They fight Lukashenka’s pro­pa­gan­da by telling the truth about what’s hap­pen­ing in Belarus. Their pub­li­ca­tions are then trans­lat­ed into Lat­vian and Russ­ian, the site’s main lan­guages. In the con­text of an infor­ma­tion war, doesn’t it make sense to strength­en the Belaru­sian divi­sion instead of clos­ing it?

“I believe that con­tent in Lat­vian pub­lic media about events in Belarus is high­ly impor­tant for the entire Lat­vian soci­ety, as it allows us to pro­vide objec­tive infor­ma­tion and com­bat dis­in­for­ma­tion and pro­pa­gan­da com­ing from the Krem­lin and the Lukashenko regime. This is cru­cial for Latvia’s secu­ri­ty, as we know well that there is also an infor­ma­tion war.

Also, con­tent in the Belaru­sian lan­guage is essen­tial for the local Belaru­sian com­mu­ni­ty, who relo­cat­ed to Latvia fol­low­ing the 2020 repres­sions of Lukashenka’s regime. It allows the Belaru­sian dias­po­ra to access infor­ma­tion about sig­nif­i­cant events and impor­tant polit­i­cal deci­sions in Latvia that affect their lives here.

I also believe it is a major advan­tage that Belaru­sian jour­nal­ists work in Lat­vian pub­lic media, as they are best posi­tioned to under­stand and rep­re­sent what mat­ters to the Belaru­sian com­mu­ni­ty in Latvia, as well as to cov­er devel­op­ments in Belarus that the entire Lat­vian soci­ety should be aware of.

I believe we must not lose this valu­able resource, nor should we, in the name of improv­ing effi­cien­cy or cut­ting costs, aban­don Belaru­sian-lan­guage con­tent in the dig­i­tal envi­ron­ment. By main­tain­ing this con­tent, we not only effec­tive­ly reach the Belaru­sian dias­po­ra in Latvia but also strength­en Latvia’s secu­ri­ty by fight­ing dis­in­for­ma­tion and show­ing sol­i­dar­i­ty with the Belaru­sian peo­ple in their strug­gle for free­dom and democ­ra­cy in Belarus.”

— The Belaru­sian dias­po­ra appealed to MPs for help in pre­serv­ing the Belaru­sian divi­sion of LSM+. How can par­lia­men­tar­i­ans assist?

“As the Chair of the Par­lia­men­tary coop­er­a­tion group in Sup­port of a Demo­c­ra­t­ic Belarus, I sup­port the call by Belaru­sian dias­po­ra orga­ni­za­tions in Latvia, as well as by the Demo­c­ra­t­ic Forces of Belarus, to pre­serve con­tent in Belaru­sian in Latvia’s pub­lic media.

When the Saeima resumes work in Sep­tem­ber after the sum­mer recess, I plan to con­vene a meet­ing of the Human Rights and Pub­lic Affairs Com­mit­tee to address this issue specif­i­cal­ly. I intend to invite the LSM Board and the Pub­lic Elec­tron­ic Mass Media Coun­cil (SEPLP) to present their planned solu­tions regard­ing the future work of LSM.

Our goal is to strength­en the new­ly unit­ed Lat­vian pub­lic media. In this process, it is essen­tial not to lose what already works well and con­tributes sig­nif­i­cant­ly to its mis­sion.”