More stories

  • in

    Republic of Congo Presidential Candidate Dies of Covid-19

    Guy-Brice Parfait Kolélas, the main opposition candidate in the Republic of Congo, gave his final speech from his hospital bed, urging his fellow citizens to vote to expel an entrenched government.DAKAR, Senegal — The opposition leader was too sick to make it to his final appointments before Sunday’s election.“I am fighting death,” he said in a weak voice on Friday, removing an oxygen mask from his face to film a message addressed to the citizens of the Republic of Congo. “But I ask you to stand up and vote for change.”Three days later, hours after the election, he was dead. He had tested positive for Covid-19.The candidate, Guy-Brice Parfait Kolélas, was trying to unseat President Denis Sassou Nguesso, who has been in power for 36 years. But on Friday, Mr. Kolélas fell ill.As voters went to the polls on Sunday, Mr. Kolélas was evacuated by air to France for treatment. But he died on the plane on his way there, his campaign director said Monday morning at a meeting of Mr. Kolélas’s political party in Brazzaville, the Congolese capital.Mr. Kolélas urged supporters to vote last week.Reuters TVFew observers expected Mr. Kolélas to win the election. But his death is nevertheless a blow for a Central African country mired in an economic crisis. The country has reported 9,564 coronavirus cases so far, and has been averaging about 34 new cases a day lately, according to a New York Times database. As in many countries, this is likely an underestimate because testing levels are low.A number of prominent African politicians have died in the past year. Some, like the Nigerian president’s right-hand man Abba Kyari and the South African cabinet minister Jackson Mphikwa Mthembu, are known to have died of Covid-19 complications. Official announcements for some others, like President John Magufuli of Tanzania and President Pierre Nkurunziza of Burundi, have said they died of heart problems, though rumors have swirled that the coronavirus played a role in their deaths.In the video recorded from his hospital bed, Mr. Kolélas told Congolese voters that they owed it to their children to cast a ballot in the election.“Fight. I will not have fought in vain,” he said in the video. “Rise up as one people. Make me happy. I’m fighting on my deathbed. You, too, fight for your change.”The son of a former prime minister who also spent many years in opposition, Mr. Kolélas served as a minister under Mr. Nguesso for six years. But in the run-up to this year’s election, he said that the Republic of Congo had become a “police state.”The internet was blocked across the country on Election Day, according to the monitoring organization Netblocks. Otherwise, the election seemed to go ahead without incident. Election results are expected later this week.“Democracy is working in our country,” Mr. Nguesso said Monday.A former military officer, Mr. Nguesso first came to power in 1977, after his predecessor was assassinated. He lost the country’s first multiparty election in 1992, but returned to power in 1997. In 2019 the nonprofit campaigning group Global Witness accused his son of stealing $50 million in state funds.Almost half the population lives in poverty in the Republic of Congo, which is one of the main oil producers on the African continent. More

  • in

    Tensions With Arab Allies Undermine a Netanyahu Pitch to Israeli Voters

    The Israeli prime minister has presented himself as a global leader, but that image has been tarnished by tensions with Jordan and the United Arab Emirates as Israeli voters head to the polls on Tuesday.JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel presents himself as a global leader who is in a different league than his rivals — one who can keep Israel safe and promote its interests on the world stage. But strains in his relations with two important Arab allies, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, have dented that image in the fraught run-up to Israel’s do-over election.Mr. Netanyahu’s personal ties with King Abdullah II of Jordan have long been frosty, even though their countries have had diplomatic relations for decades, and recently took a turn for the worse. And the Israeli leader’s efforts to capitalize on his new partnership with the United Arab Emirates before the close-fought election on Tuesday have injected a sour note into the budding relationship between the two countries.Senior Emirati officials sent clear signals over the past week that the Persian Gulf country would not be drawn into Mr. Netanyahu’s campaign for re-election, a rebuke that dented his much-vaunted foreign policy credentials.Mr. Netanyahu, Israel’s longest serving prime minister, has always portrayed himself as the only candidate who can protect Israel’s security and ensure its survival in what has mostly been a hostile region. He has touted peaceful relations with moderate Arab states, including Jordan and the Emirates, as crucial to defending Israel’s borders and as a buttress against Iranian ambitions in the region.But the tensions with Jordan and the U.A.E. undermine Mr. Netanyahu’s attempts to present himself as a Middle East peacemaker as part of his bid to remain in power while on trial on corruption charges.The first signs of trouble came after plans for Mr. Netanyahu’s first open visit to the Emirates were canceled. Israel and the United Arab Emirates reached a landmark agreement last August to normalize their relations, the first step in a broader regional process that came to be known as the Abraham Accords and that was a signature foreign policy achievement of the Trump administration.Mr. Netanyahu was supposed to fly to the Emirates’ capital, Abu Dhabi, on March 11 for a whirlwind meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, the country’s de facto ruler. But the plan went awry amid a separate diplomatic spat with Jordan, one of the first Arab countries to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1994.The day before the scheduled trip, a rare visit by the Jordanian crown prince to the Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem — one of Islam’s holiest sites — was scuttled because of a disagreement between Jordan and Israel over security arrangements for the prince.That led Jordan, which borders Israel, to delay granting permission for the departure of a private jet that was waiting there to take Mr. Netanyahu to the Emirates. By the time permission came through, it was too late and Mr. Netanyahu had to cancel the trip.The signing of the Abraham Accords at the White House in September. Doug Mills/The New York TimesMr. Netanyahu said later that day that the visit had been put off “due to misunderstandings and difficulties in coordinating our flights” that stemmed from the disagreement with Jordan. He said that he had spoken with the “great leader of the U.A.E.” and that the visit would be rescheduled very soon.Mr. Netanyahu told Israel’s Army Radio last week that his visit to Abu Dhabi had been postponed several times over the past few months “due to the lockdowns and other reasons.”But he made things worse by publicly boasting after his call with Prince Mohammed that the Emirates intended to invest “the vast sum of $10 billion” in various projects in Israel.“It became clear to Prince Mohammed that Netanyahu was just using him for electoral purposes,” said Martin S. Indyk, a distinguished fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who was formerly a special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.The Emiratis threw aside their usual discretion and made no secret of their displeasure.“From the UAE’s perspective, the purpose of the Abrahamic Accords is to provide a robust strategic foundation to foster peace and prosperity with the State of Israel and in the wider region,” Anwar Gargash, who served until last month as the Emirates’ minister of state for foreign affairs and who is now an adviser to the country’s president, wrote on Twitter.“The UAE will not be a part in any internal electioneering in Israel, now or ever,” he added.Representatives of Israeli businesses  in a V.I.P. room in the Burj Khalifa, a Dubai landmark, in October. Dan Balilty for The New York TimesSultan Ahmed Al Jaber, the Emirati minister of industry and advanced technology, told The Nation, an Emirati newspaper, last week that the Emiratis were still examining investment prospects but that they would be “commercially driven and not politically associated.” The country is “at a very early stage in studying the laws and policies in Israel,” he said.Mr. Netanyahu’s aborted push to visit the Emirates before the Israeli election on Tuesday also upended a plan for the Arab country to host an Abraham Accords summit meeting in April, according to an individual who had been briefed on the details of the episode.That gathering would have assembled Mr. Netanyahu, leaders of the Emirates and of Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan — the other countries with which Israel signed normalization deals in recent months — and Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken.Mr. Indyk described Mr. Netanyahu’s relationships with Prince Mohammed of the U.A.E. and King Abdullah II of Jordan as “broken” and in need of mending.In the first heady months after the deal between Israel and the Emirates, Israeli tech executives and tourists flooded into Dubai, one of the seven emirates that make up the country, despite pandemic restrictions. Now, analysts said, the honeymoon is over even though there has been no indication the normalization deal is in danger of collapse.The relationship is essentially “on hold,” said Oded Eran, a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv and a former Israeli ambassador to the European Union and Jordan.Beyond Mr. Netanyahu’s electioneering, Mr. Eran said, the Emiratis were upset because as part of the normalization deal, Israel dropped its opposition to the Emiratis’ buying F-35 fighter jets and other advanced weaponry from the United States, but that transaction is now stalled and under review by the Biden administration.In addition, he said, the Emirati leaders were concerned about what might happen after the election in Israel. Mr. Netanyahu has said his goal is to form a right-wing coalition with parties that put a priority on annexing West Bank territory in one way or another.“They are not canceling the deal, but they don’t want more at this point,” Mr. Eran said of the Emiratis. “They want to see what the agenda of the new government will be.”Supporters of Mr. Netanyahu campaigning last month in Jerusalem. Menahem Kahana/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMr. Netanyahu’s political opponents have seized upon the diplomatic debacle.“Unfortunately, Netanyahu’s conduct in recent years has done significant damage to our relations with Jordan, causing Israel to lose considerable defensive, diplomatic and economic assets,” said Benny Gantz, the Israeli defense minister and a centrist political rival.“I will personally work alongside the entire Israeli defense establishment to continue strengthening our relationship with Jordan,” he added, “while also deepening ties with other countries in the region.”Mr. Netanyahu has said that four more countries were waiting to sign normalization agreements with Israel, without specifying which ones. More

  • in

    Palestinians and Israelis Both Vote Soon. The Differences Are Stark.

    Many Israelis feel numbed by their endless election cycle. Many Palestinians are excited about a rare chance to vote — but others expect little change without statehood.JERUSALEM — When Yona Schnitzer, a 32-year-old Israeli content editor, heard about the latest Israeli election — Israel’s fourth in two years — he felt a surge of anger at how the government had collapsed yet again, and questioned the point of taking part. “My initial reaction was,” Mr. Schnitzer said, “‘I can’t believe this is happening again.’”When Sobhi al-Khazendar, a 27-year-old Palestinian lawyer, heard about the latest Palestinian election — the first since 2006 — he felt a wave of exhilaration and quickly registered to vote. “All my life,” Mr. Khazendar said, “I have never been represented by someone whom I helped choose.”In a rare alignment, Israelis and Palestinians are preparing for near-simultaneous elections and, at least on the surface, their moods could not be more different.The Israeli vote on Tuesday feels to many voters like Groundhog Day, the latest in a seemingly unending series of elections in which no party has been able to win enough support to form a stable majority. It is the embodiment of the profound political paralysis that has been partly caused by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s efforts to remain in office while standing trial for corruption.The Palestinian election, scheduled for May 22, will be the first since a violent rift in 2007 between the Palestinian faction that controls the Gaza Strip, the Islamist militant group Hamas, and its rival that exerts limited autonomy over parts of the West Bank, the mainstream Fatah.“Young Palestinians want change, they want a different life,” said Mkhaimar Abusada, a political-science professor at Al Azhar University in Gaza. “The Israelis are sick and tired of going to elections four times in two years — but we haven’t had elections in 15 years.”In the occupied territories, many of those eager to vote in May were too young to vote in the last election, and dream of a new and more competent Palestinian leadership with a clearer idea of how to achieve statehood. More than 93 percent of Palestinians have already registered to vote, a fact that analysts say illustrates an initial enthusiasm for the process.An electoral roll sheet at a school in Gaza City. The Palestinian election is scheduled for May 22.Mohammed Abed/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMahmoud Abbas, the 85-year-old president of the Palestinian Authority, has canceled scheduled elections in the past. He may yet do the same this year, fearing a loss for his party, Fatah. But if they go ahead, the May 22 elections would elect a Palestinian legislative council that might — in a best-case scenario — pave the way for a reunification of Gaza and parts of the West Bank — which have been run separately since the 2007 split — under one governing body.That would allow Palestinian lawmakers to propose laws and debate and scrutinize key issues in the council, which has not met in a regular session since 2007, ending Mr. Abbas’s ability to rule by decree and without oversight.“It brings me a lot of excitement,” said Mr. Khazendar, the young lawyer. “I always read in the press about all these people speaking in the name of the Palestinian people or the Palestinian youth. But we didn’t pick any of them.”Many Palestinians and international rights campaigners warn that the Palestinian elections are no game changer for Palestinian rights. Palestinians in the occupied territories cannot vote in the election that will have the greatest effect on their lives — the Israeli one.While Hamas controls the internal affairs of Gaza and the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority governs parts of the West Bank, many crucial aspects of Palestinian life are still decided by Israel.In the West Bank, Israel still fully governs more than 60 percent of the territory, controls access between most Palestinian-run towns and frequently conducts military raids even within places nominally under Mr. Abbas’s control.In Gaza, the Israeli and Egyptian governments control what and who can come in and out, as well as most of the electricity and fuel supply. Israel also controls Gaza’s airspace, birth registry, access to the sea and access to cellular data, and restricts the access of Gazan farmers to their fields at the edge of the strip.“Millions of Palestinians living under occupation can’t vote for the people who effectively rule and control their daily lives,” said Inès Abdel Razek, advocacy director at the Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy, an independent campaign group in Ramallah. “This is no democracy.”Palestinian workers preparing ballots for the upcoming Israeli election at a factory in Karnei Shomron. Israel’s election will be its fourth in two years.Menahem Kahana/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIsraeli leaders have paid almost no public attention to the Palestinian election — even though it might conceivably produce a united Palestinian leadership that could present a joint front in peace negotiations with Israel. Conversely, if the vote gives Hamas a bigger role within Palestinian governance, that could also affect Israel’s ability to coordinate with the Palestinian Authority — since Hamas does not recognize Israel and is considered a terrorist group by Israel and much of the international community.By contrast, many Palestinians keep a close eye on Israeli politics, said Professor Abusada, who said it was “a sad thing” to see Israeli elections stuck in such a repetitive loop. But at least Israelis had the opportunity to vote so often, he said. “We haven’t been able to for a long time,” he added. “It makes us feel cynical about our own political system that we are not able to make any change.”Within the confines of Palestinian politics, the prospect of an election has nevertheless shaken up some of the alliances and assumptions of the previously moribund Palestinian polity. For the first time in years, Palestinians can imagine the dormant Parliament buildings in Ramallah and Gaza City coming back to life. And Fatah, long the engine of the Palestinian national movement, now faces challenges not just from Hamas but from other parts of secular Palestinian society.Confirmed or potential challengers include Salam Fayyad, a former prime minister of the Palestinian Authority; Mohammed Dahlan, a former Fatah security chief who now lives in exile in the United Arab Emirates; and Nasser al-Kidwa, a former Palestinian envoy to the United Nations, and the nephew of Yasir Arafat, Mr. Abbas’s predecessor.All three said they wanted to help found new alliances to compete against Fatah and Hamas, while allies of Marwan Barghouti, an influential Fatah militant jailed in Israel for five counts of murder, said he was considering it.In Gaza, Hamas faces a threat from a generation of young Palestinians struggling to find work. The unemployment rate in Gaza hovers around 50 percent, largely because of the blockade that Israel has placed on the enclave in order to undermine Hamas’s military activity and rocket production. If Hamas were replaced by a unity government, some Gazans hope, the new leadership might defuse at least some of the tensions with Israel and improve living conditions.“We want jobs more than rockets,” said Amr al-Shaer, a jobless 21-year-old in Rafah, southern Gaza.Packing food supplies at a United Nations Relief and Works Agency warehouse in Gaza City.Khalil Hamra/Associated PressBut beneath the initial enthusiasm for Palestinian elections, there is also a growing cynicism about whether the process will lead to meaningful change.Fatah and Hamas have not agreed on the details of how they would unify their two administrations and security departments following the election. Critics fear that unless they achieve a clear consensus in advance, the two groups will never get around to an agreement, allowing them to retain their respective monopolies on power in Gaza and the West Bank.Candidates must be over 28 and each party list must provide a $20,000 deposit, restrictions that rule out most potential participants. And Mr. Abbas has recently issued presidential decrees that critics say restrict judicial independence and civil society.“It looks like an effort to bring legitimacy to the people who have been there all along,” said Daoud Ghannam, a 29-year-old founder of a co-working space in Ramallah.“At the beginning we were like: ‘Wow, we have elections finally,’” said Mr. Ghannam. “Then we read the details.”Now, Mr. Ghannam said, “We don’t see anything changing. It will be just like a show.”Iyad Abuheweila More

  • in

    Louisiana Primary Election Results 2021

    The race to succeed the White House adviser Cedric Richmond in the Second Congressional District has been dominated by two New Orleans state senators, Karen Carter Peterson and Troy Carter. In the Fifth District, Julia Letlow is the heavy favorite to claim the seat to which her husband, Luke Letlow, was elected in November before he died of the coronavirus. Both races could be headed for runoffs if no candidate garners 50 percent of the vote. See full results from the Louisiana general election in November. More

  • in

    Hong Kong, Its Elections Upended, Reconsiders Its Dream of Democracy

    The promise of universal suffrage has animated the city’s politics for decades. Beijing’s latest moves could finally extinguish that hope.HONG KONG — From her first protest at age 12, Jackie Chen believed she could help bring democracy to Hong Kong. Each summer, she marched in demonstrations calling for universal suffrage. She eagerly cast her ballot in elections.Now Ms. Chen, 44, is not sure if she will ever vote again.“If we continue to participate in this game, it’s like we’re accepting what they’re doing,” she said. “That would make me feel like an accomplice.”The Chinese government has upended the political landscape in Hong Kong, redefining the city’s relationship with democracy. Its plan to drastically overhaul the local electoral system, by demanding absolute loyalty from candidates running for office, is leaving factions across the political spectrum wondering what participation, if any, is still possible.Self-declared moderates aren’t sure they would pass Beijing’s litmus test. In the opposition camp, political leaders have slowed their voter registration efforts and are unsure if they will try to field candidates again.Jackie Chen, 44, said she would “feel like an accomplice” if she kept voting in Hong Kong’s elections after the changes imposed by China.Lam Yik Fei for The New York TimesThe changes to the voting system signal the gutting of a promise that has been central to Hong Kong since its 1997 return to Chinese control: that its residents would some day get to choose their own leaders, rather than being subject to the whims of London or Beijing. That promise is enshrined in the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s mini-constitution, which pledges that universal suffrage is the “ultimate aim.”Beijing has now made clear that it has no plans to meet that aim — at least, not on the terms that many Hong Kongers expected. The changes are also likely to slash the number of directly elected seats in the local legislature to their lowest levels since the British colonial era, meaning the majority of lawmakers would be picked by government allies.Though officials still nod to universal suffrage, theirs is a circumscribed version. A Chinese official in Hong Kong suggested last week that establishment lawmakers chosen through small-circle elections, of the type favored by Beijing, were equivalent to those elected by the general public.“The establishment camp is also pro-democracy,” the official, Song Ru’an, told reporters. “They’re all chosen through elections, and they all work on behalf of the people.”Indeed, many of Beijing’s supporters see the changes as a step toward more, not less, democracy. If the central government trusts Hong Kong’s electoral system, the thinking goes, it may be more willing to grant those long-promised rights.At a street stall where he was collecting signatures in support of the electoral changes, Choi Fung-wa, 47, said he shared many Hong Kongers’ goal of one day voting for the city’s top leader. That person, the chief executive, is currently selected by a group of 1,200 people dominated by pro-Beijing interests. Mr. Choi, who moved to Hong Kong from the mainland 33 years ago, said he, too, wanted a sense of ownership over the outcome.Hong Kong’s chief executive, Carrie Lam. The chief executive is chosen by a small group dominated by pro-Beijing interests.Lam Yik Fei for The New York TimesBut he felt the opposition camp had alienated the authorities by sometimes using violence and by demanding universal suffrage too quickly. (The Basic Law raised the possibility that the chief executive could be popularly elected as early as 2007, but Beijing has repeatedly delayed.)Screening candidates would ensure that future politicians were more moderate, Mr. Choi said. “Right now we have people who want to mess things up,” he said, standing under a giant Chinese flag that his group had erected on a sidewalk in North Point, a working-class neighborhood where support for the government runs high.“There will be a new pro-democracy wing that comes out, and they probably will actually want to act in the interests of the people,” Mr. Choi said.Hong Kong’s electoral system has always been skewed in favor of the establishment, but many residents had still hoped their votes could send a message. When activists swept neighborhood-level elections in 2019, at the peak of huge pro-democracy protests, they held it up as proof of their popular mandate. Even after Beijing imposed a national security law last year to quash dissent, protesters prepared to contest — and thought they could win — the next legislative elections.Celebrating pro-democracy activists’ victories in neighborhood-level elections in Hong Kong in November 2019.Lam Yik Fei for The New York TimesThen the authorities arrested 53 people in January for participating in an informal primary ahead of those elections. The elections themselves were postponed for a year, and officials say they may be delayed again.Ms. Chen, the democracy supporter who is unsure about voting again, said the electoral changes were more disheartening than the national security law. “Voting isn’t organizing anything or trying to subvert the government,” she said. “It’s just each person voting to express their individual views. If we don’t even have this basic right, then I just don’t know what to say.”Beijing has said the changes are meant to block candidates it deems anti-China, or who have openly called for independence for Hong Kong. But moderates also worry that they will be shut out of the new system.Hong Kong’s politicians have long described their role as juggling the demands of two masters who are often at odds: Communist Party leaders in Beijing, and the people of Hong Kong. But Beijing has increasingly insisted that its will come first, a mandate crystallized in the new election rules, which allow only “patriots” to hold office.That demand holds little appeal for Derek Yuen, 42, who had planned to run for the legislature as a self-declared centrist. He had criticized the authorities’ handling of the 2019 protests as needlessly confrontational, but he had also once worked for a pro-Beijing political party and called the protesters’ demands unrealistic.But he feels he would be unable to win the approval of the new screening committee without hiding his views. “I’m not a genius ass-kisser,” he said with a laugh.Mr. Yuen, who holds a Ph.D. in strategic studies, said he would focus on writing commentaries and policy proposals that would allow him to stay involved indirectly.“I like to be in politics,” he said, “but there are just way too many constraints.”Many of Beijing’s supporters in Hong Kong see the changes to the voting system as a step toward more democracy, not less.Lam Yik Fei for The New York TimesSuch retreats seem to be a broader goal of the electoral reforms, and of Beijing’s crackdown more generally. Hong Kong has long had a reputation for valuing a flourishing economy over political engagement, and the Chinese authorities have encouraged that.“Preserving Hong Kong’s prosperity is what accords with most Hong Kong people’s interests,” said Mr. Song, the Chinese official.In a sign of how deeply the last two years have ruptured the city’s way of life, some pro-democracy Hong Kongers have greeted the idea of a reprieve from politics with resignation, or even cautious optimism.Whenever elections rolled around, Ho Oi-Yan, 40, voted for pro-democracy candidates. In 2019, she, along with hundreds of thousands of others, took to the streets to protest China’s encroachment on the city’s freedoms.Though she moved overseas that fall, she flew back soon afterward, just to back the pro-democracy camp in local elections. She waited almost two hours to vote, sending photos of the line to other newly energized friends.Yet Ms. Ho said she would set her passion aside if the local economy improved and she could return.“I would go back and just not talk about politics and live,” she said by telephone. “When you need to make a living, then you have no choice.”Some believe that trying to extinguish Hong Kong’s democracy will only harden the opposition’s resolve.“I have no choice but to keep working on it,” Owen Au said of his pro-democracy activism. Lam Yik Fei for The New York TimesAfter the police ended a mass movement for universal suffrage in 2014, many supporters worried that dreams of democracy were dead. But when those demands resurfaced in 2019, the crowds ballooned.Faith in that resilience has shaped the life of Owen Au, who was in high school in 2014. Invigorated by those protests, he enrolled at the Chinese University of Hong Kong to study politics. He was elected president of the student union. He dreamed of running for higher office.He knows that is impossible now. He is facing charges of unauthorized assembly related to the 2019 protests, and he said he would never qualify under the candidate-vetting system anyway.But far from pushing him out of the political arena, Mr. Au said, the crackdown will guarantee that he stays in it. He expects that no major company will hire him. Besides activism, he doesn’t know what else he could do.“I have no choice but to keep working on it,” he said. “But it’s not a bad thing. Most of the other paths, I’m not so interested in. But this one could ignite my hope.”Water-filled barriers in front of Hong Kong’s legislature, placed there to deter protesters. Lam Yik Fei for The New York Times More

  • in

    A Pro-Europe, Anti-Populist Youth Party Scored Surprising Gains in the Dutch Elections

    For years, right-wing populists have been a driving force in the Netherlands. But this week a pan-European party called Volt shook things up.Lost among the mostly humdrum national elections in the Netherlands this week was the emergence of Volt, an anti-populist, pro-Europe party made up of students and young professionals that snatched three seats in the Dutch Parliament — the first national electoral success in its five years of existence.Volt wasn’t the only outsider group to win a seat or two in the elections. One politician arrived at Parliament driving a tractor with flashing lights to claim her newly won seat for a farmer’s party. Sylvana Simons, a former TV presenter, won a seat for “Bij1,” an anticapitalist party. A new far right, anti-immigrant party won four seats.Over the last two decades, however, it was populists and far right parties that played the insurgent role in Dutch politics, promoting anti-immigrant, anti-establishment and anti-European policies. While never a serious threat to seize power, in 2016 representatives of these parties initiated and won a referendum in the Netherlands on an E.U. trade treaty with Ukraine, temporarily halting the deal.This makes this week’s victory of newcomer Volt all the more remarkable. The party is staunchly pro-Europe, something that most traditional parties had thought was a complete turnoff for voters.“Most people of my generation grew up paying in euros and never having to think about crossing borders,” said Laurens Dassen, 35, the party’s Dutch leader. “For us, Europe is a fact of life.”Prime Minister Mark Rutte, whose center-right Party for Freedom and Democracy comfortably won the greatest number of seats for the fourth time since 2010, has had a tense relationship with Europe. Last year, for example, he upset Southern European countries when he refused to discuss financial support during the pandemic, and brought a biography of Chopin to the meetings because he wasn’t planning on talking anyway.The success of Volt in the Netherlands is all the more remarkable in that it isn’t even a Dutch party but an offshoot of a European movement, with 9,000 members scattered across Europe, and a few more in Switzerland and Albania. The main party was established in 2016 by Andrea Venzon, 29, an Italian living in London, and has a presence in every one of the 27 member states of the European Union.Caroline van der Plas, the leader of the BoerBurgerBeweging party, speaking with journalists from the booth of her tractor.Remko De Waal/Agence France-Presse, via Getty ImagesMr. Dassen, who was raised in Knegsel, a village near Eindhoven, played in the local youth orchestra and, after studying business management, went to work at ABN Amro bank checking processes for transactions in money laundering.But he was worried about the rise of populism and far-right parties, he said, and “in 2018 I read an article about Volt, decided to join and gave up my job some months later to really try to get the party started.”In the Dutch elections Volt piled up heavy vote totals in several Dutch student cities like Delft and Leiden, powered in part by a social media campaign and a broad network of volunteers.Another pro-European party, the D66, won an extra four seats this week, making it the second largest party in the parliament. Its leader, Sigrid Kaag, is a former United Nations special envoy for Syria and the outgoing foreign minister of trade and development.Because no party in the Dutch Parliament commands a majority, analysts said the idiosyncrasies of coalition building could bring Volt into the governing bloc along with Mr. Rutte and Ms. Kaag. Whatever the outcome of that horse trading, analysts think Volt’s future is bright in the Netherlands.“They could be big here and double their seats if they manage to go even stronger on the climate,” said Felix Rotterberg, a campaign strategist long affiliated with the social-democratic party PvdA. “Volt has the youth, and there will only be more of those in the future.”The party is on a winning streak in other parts of Europe, though nothing else is as high-profile as its victories in the Netherlands. Volt now has over 30 elected representatives across Europe, mainly in municipalities in Germany and Italy. But it has also won its first seat in the European Parliament, in the person of Damian Boeselager, 33.In coming months, Volt will be running candidates in national elections in Bulgaria and Germany, in a regional vote in Spain and in local elections in Italy. Following Brexit this year, its British members are starting a rejoin Europe campaign. Its leaders emphasize Volt’s pan-European character, which they say differentiates it from any other party in Europe.“Every one of our members, has direct voting rights at the European level, they are able to choose our board and influence our policies directly,” said Valerie Sternberg, 30, the party’s Germany-based co-president. “No matter where you live in Europe, even in Britain.” The party doesn’t have a youth organization. “Most of us are young ourselves,” she said.Ms. Sternberg said she cried “tears of joy,” when she learned about the success of Volt’s Dutch chapter, and said the party is now setting its sights on Germany, which is having national elections in the fall.“Our weak point is in rural areas across Europe, we need to get our message there, now populists are winning there,” she said. “We hope that Covid is showing people that isolation makes us weak and cooperation makes us stronger.” More

  • in

    ¿Qué es alta política? Vacunar a todos

    Las vacunaciones en América Latina han sido un desastre, producto de problemas de infraestructura y una dirigencia demasiado ocupada en su subsistencia. ¿Pedimos demasiado si reclamamos hacer lo correcto?Hace unos días escuché conversar a dos mujeres en Barcelona mientras esperaban por su vacuna contra la covid. Una se quejaba del manejo de la pandemia con una amargura ecuménica: no importa si eres catalanista o estás a favor del gobierno central, decía, necesitas dar señales claras. Debe haber un mando único, aseguraba. La amiga asentía y al final soltó la perla: “Así debe ser, pero no puedes derramar vino de un cazo vacío”.Europa aun tienen dificultades para probar que la vacunación puede ser veloz cuando poco más del 4 por ciento de la población continental ha recibido un pinchazo en el brazo. Pensaba en eso —y en las señoras del cazo vacío— cuando revisaba las cifras de vacunación en América Latina. Excluido Chile —donde aproximadamente el 20 por ciento de la población está vacunada y se anuncia inmunidad de rebaño tan temprano como en junio—, el resto de la región no ha inyectado, en promedio, ni al uno por ciento de sus ciudadanos.América Latina no ha sido inmune a la degradación creciente de la política, con dirigencias obsesivamente ocupadas en la próxima elección —o en la perpetuidad— y en peleas menores entre gobiernos y oposiciones mientras pobreza, corrupción, atraso y, ahora, miles de muertes parecen suceder en un universo paralelo. Es ciertamente enervante que la escala de prioridades parezca al revés o, peor, inexistente.Estos son momentos de alta política, y alta política ahora es vacunar pronto a todo el mundo. Los míos, los tuyos, los ajenos. Ricos, pobres. Tener que escribir esto es increíble, porque es evidente, pero vamos: no hay mejor política de Estado que superar la facción y trabajar para todos. Cuando se trata de salud pública en una pandemia, la ideología es una: socializas beneficios.Y, sin embargo, muchos mandatarios y gobiernos parecen más preocupados en ganar las próximas elecciones. El ciclo electoral inició en 2021 con Ecuador y en los últimos meses votaron El Salvador y Bolivia. Este año habrá presidenciales en Perú, Nicaragua, Chile, Honduras, legislativas en México y Argentina y municipales en Paraguay. Toda la región parece en campaña electoral y la pandemia ha resultado una magnífica oportunidad propagandística. Pero las contiendas y las disputas políticas debieran ser secundarias cuando es preciso detener las muertes actuales y evitar la expansión del virus con vacunas. Pronto, sin improvisar y sin opacidad.Es imperdonable que los políticos privilegien sus disputas por encima de las necesidades de las mayorías. Y no es que no deban defender sus intereses sino que la escala de prioridades no admite discusión: la demanda de la facción no puede moralmente anteponerse a la necesidad general. No puede ser votos o muertos.Los problemas son mayores. En toda la región, el déficit de insumos y equipamiento ha sido democráticamente lamentable. Y las imágenes son desastrosas: hospitales desbordados de Perú y Ecuador, falta de información y hasta represión en Nicaragua y Venezuela, un colapso anunciado en Brasil y México es el tercer país con mayor número de muertes del mundo.A los errores de la gestión de la pandemia, se suman décadas de mala gobernanza. Mientras los gobiernos de Corea, Taiwán y Japón implementaron un rastreo minucioso de casos; en muchas ciudades principales de América Latina no hay siquiera padrones digitalizados de la ciudadanía ni bases de datos centralizadas. Unos 34 millones de latinoamericanos no tienen documentos de identificación, lo que significa que ni siquiera figuran en un registro civil. El sistema tiene ineficiencias que preceden a casi todos los gobiernos actuales. Por eso cuando llega una crisis, encuentras enfermeras malpagadas y agotadas atendiendo enfermos envueltas en bolsas de basura pues carecen de equipos. Y observas que algunos gobiernos no se agenciaron suficientes vacunas por incapacidades burocráticas e imprevisión administrativa.De acuerdo, todo esto podría ser achacable al desguace estructural de la salud pública, pero estamos en otro juego cuando episodios de abuso y amiguismo o las agendas políticas de quienes ahora están al mando se interponen entre la vida y la muerte de la población. Si nuestros dirigentes se emplean más en sus guerritas de baja intensidad para acumular poder mientras sus ciudadanos mueren, son miserables.La inversión de prioridades sucede en casi toda la región. Jair Bolsonaro —que cambió cuatro veces de ministro de Salud— entiende la pandemia como un problema personal: entorpeció su deseo de manejar Brasil a placer. Andrés Manuel López Obrador pasa más tiempo empeñado en defender la Cuarta Transformación rumbo a las elecciones legislativas que podrían darle una mayoría absoluta en el Congreso que creando planes de rescate económico a los habitantes de México. En Argentina, el proceso de vacunación está sembrado de dudas: ¿sería tan veloz si el gobierno de Alberto Fernández no tuviera una elección intermedia por ganar? Tampoco en El Salvador, Nicaragua o Venezuela ha habido la integridad de separar el rol funcionarial de la propaganda.En el fondo, la manera en que vacunamos habla de lo que creemos y somos capaces. En Argentina, por ejemplo, una líder opositora sugirió que debiera permitirse a los privados vender dosis y enviar a quien no tiene dinero a la seguridad social o a pedir subsidios. La idea es un absurdo cuando la mayoría de los procesos exitosos de vacunación —y de gestión de la pandemia en las fases críticas— son públicos y centralizados. La evidencia sugiere que una campaña veloz y masiva requiere del Estado a cargo con apoyo de voluntarios de la sociedad civil.El Estado es un elefante —fofo o hambreado— y precisa gimnasia. Por eso es relevante el factor humano para moverlo. Esto es, aun cuando hay infraestructura y enfrentas una crisis de salud pública, la inteligencia de gestión y la capacidad burocrática son capitales. Pero si quienes dirigen lanzan señales equívocas o son cínicos incapaces de hacer alta política, los resultados no pueden ser más que letales. América Latina es ya la región del mundo con más muertos por habitante.Si la opinión pública sabe que las infraestructuras son buenas y sus dirigentes dan el ejemplo, no tendrá una repentina crisis de desconfianza. Las infraestructuras deben soportar; los funcionarios, funcionar.¿Hay sustancia, entonces, o deberemos convencernos de que pedimos vino a una clase política que es un cazo vacío?Diego Fonseca (@DiegoFonsecaDF) es colaborador regular de The New York Times y director del Seminario Iberoamericano de Periodismo Emprendedor en CIDE-México y del Institute for Socratic Dialogue de Barcelona. Voyeur es su último libro. More

  • in

    Will Israel’s Strong Vaccination Campaign Give Netanyahu an Election Edge?

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is banking on voters crediting him for beating the pandemic. But many worry that the country’s reopening may be premature and politically driven.JERUSALEM — Vaccinated Israelis are working out in gyms and dining in restaurants. By this weekend they will be partying at nightclubs and cheering at soccer matches by the thousands.Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is taking credit for bringing Israel “back to life” and banking on the country’s giddy, post-pandemic mood of liberation to put him over the top in a close election on Tuesday.But nothing is quite that simple in Israeli politics.While most Israelis appreciate the government’s impressive, world-leading vaccination campaign, many worry that the grand social and economic reopening may prove premature and suspect that the timing is political.Instead of public health professionals making transparent decisions about reopening, “decisions are made at the last minute, at night, by the cabinet,” complained Prof. Hagai Levine, an epidemiologist at the Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Public Health in Jerusalem. “The timing, right before the election, is intended to declare mission accomplished.”The parliamentary election on Tuesday will be the country’s fourth in two years. For Mr. Netanyahu, who is on trial on corruption charges, his best chance of avoiding conviction lies in heading a new right-wing government, analysts say, and he has staked everything on his handling of the coronavirus crisis.He takes personal credit for the vaccination campaign, which has seen about half the country’s 9 million people receive a second Pfizer shot, outpacing the rest of the world, and has declared victory over the virus.“Israel is the world champion in vaccinations, the first country in the world to exit from the health corona and the economic corona,” he said at a pre-election conference this week.A vaccination site at a mall in Givatayim, Israel. Half of the country’s 9 million people have received a second shot of the Pfizer vaccine, outpacing the rest of the world.Oded Balilty/Associated PressHe has presented himself as the only candidate who could have pulled off the deal with Pfizer to secure the early delivery of millions of vaccines, boasting of his personal appeals to Pfizer’s CEO, Albert Bourla, who, as a son of Holocaust survivors, had great affinity for Israel.Mr. Netanyahu even posted a clip from South Park, the American animated sitcom, acknowledging Israel’s vaccination supremacy.But experts said his claim that the virus was in the rearview mirror was overly optimistic.Just months ago, Israel’s daily infection rates and death rates were among the worst in the world. By February, Israel was also leading the world in the number of lockdown days. About two million Israelis under 16 are so far unable to get vaccinated and about a million eligible citizens have so far chosen not to.With much of the adult population now vaccinated, weekly infection rates have been dropping dramatically. But there are still more than a thousand new cases a day, an infection rate that, adjusted for population, remains higher than those of the United States, Canada, Britain, Germany, Spain and others.Health officials approved the reopening of businesses and leisure activities. But they sharply criticized a High Court decision this week lifting the quotas on airport arrivals, in part to allow Israeli citizens abroad to get back and vote.“The High Court is taking responsibility for the risk of mutations entering Israel,” Yoav Kish, the deputy health minister, wrote on Twitter. “Good luck to us all.”Critics blame the government for having failed to establish a reliable system to enforce quarantine for people entering the country, and health experts warn that they could bring in dangerous variants of the virus that are more resistant to the vaccine.The dizzying mix of health policy and electioneering has left many Israelis in a state of confusion, out celebrating but also fearing that the rapid reopening may be reckless.“I believe after the elections things will close again,” said Eran Avishai, the part-owner of a popular Mediterranean restaurant in Jerusalem. “It’s political and not logical that I can open a restaurant while my son, who’s in 10th grade, can only go to school for a few hours twice a week. There are hidden agendas.”Israelis are celebrating new freedoms, like eating in restaurants, but many fear the country’s rapid reopening may be reckless.Atef Safadi/EPA, via ShutterstockBut as a businessman, he added, “I thank Bibi every morning when I wake up,” referring to Mr. Netanyahu by his nickname.The reopening did not lead to an immediate boost for Mr. Netanyahu’s conservative Likud party in pre-election opinion polls, suggesting that his claim of vanquishing the virus may not be enough to persuade those who voted against him in the last three elections to change their minds.For at least two years, Israel has been stuck in political gridlock, roughly divided between pro- and anti-Netanyahu voters. A stalemate in the last three elections prevented either side from securing a majority in Parliament that would allow it to form a stable coalition government.Mr. Netanyahu’s critics accuse him of having mismanaged the health crisis over much of the last year by putting politics and personal interests ahead of the public’s, for example by going easy on those members of the ultra-Orthodox community who flouted lockdown rules in order to maintain the loyalty of his ultra-Orthodox coalition allies.“It’s a mixed bag,” said Gadi Wolfsfeld, a professor of political communication at the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya. “On the one hand Netanyahu gets credit for bringing the vaccines quickly and making Israel the most vaccinated society. On the other hand, a lot of people are angry at the way the ultra-Orthodox got away with everything, and he is identified with that. And people are mad about the lockdowns.”The hasty reopening was a “cynical strategy,” he said, because any resulting increase in infection would only become apparent after the election.Even as many businesses have reopened, other storefronts across the country were displaying “For Sale” or “To Let” signs after the pandemic left them permanently shuttered.Mr. Netanyahu’s political rivals have homed in on his failures in handling the pandemic, which has taken the lives of more than 6,000 Israelis.“6,000 victims of the government’s failed management will not be coming ‘Back to Life,’” Yair Lapid, leader of the centrist opposition to Mr. Netanyahu, wrote on Twitter. “Israel needs a sane government.”Mr. Netanyahu has been criticized by his rivals for his failures in handling the pandemic, which has killed more than 6,000 Israelis.Menahem Kahana/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA rival from the right, Naftali Bennett, brought out a booklet late last year titled, “How to Beat an Epidemic,” suggesting that he could have done a better job. But it’s impossible to know if he would have fared better than Mr. Netanyahu.“Even if his opponents’ criticism is very harsh, they don’t have the deeds to prove they could have done any better in combating the virus,” said Gayil Talshir, a political scientist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.For once, she said, Mr. Netanyahu was running a positive campaign largely based on his achievements, rather than a divisive one that pitted different segments of the population against each other.The logistics of holding an election during a pandemic, however, could skew the projections. The Central Elections Committee has decided to place ballot boxes inside nursing homes, a measure that may increase voter turnout among the older population. There will also be polling stations at the airport.There will be more ballot boxes than usual, as well as 50 mobile voting stations to reduce overcrowding. There will be special transportation and separate polling stations for people infected with the virus or in quarantine.But Israel does not offer voting by mail or absentee voting except for diplomats or other officials serving abroad, and some people may still be anxious about coming out to vote.Whether the vaccination campaign and the reopening of the economy can break Israel’s political impasse remains unclear.“It is too soon to judge,” said Ayelet Frish, a strategic consultant, days before the election. The electorate and the politicians remained split, she said, between what she called the pro-Netanyahu “I brought the vaccines” camp and the anti-Netanyahu “Because of you we have 6,000 dead” camp.So far, she said, “It’s a draw.” More