More stories

  • in

    Elecciones en Israel: esto necesitas saber

    Los israelíes votarán el 23 de marzo otra vez para poner fin a un impasse político que lleva dos años instalado en el país. Aquí tienes las claves de los comicios.JERUSALÉN — Los israelíes acudirán a las urnas el martes 23 de marzo por cuarta vez en dos años, con la esperanza de poner fin a un ciclo aparentemente interminable de votaciones y un estancamiento político que ha dejado al país sin presupuesto nacional durante la pandemia.El primer ministro, Benjamin Netanyahu, espera que el programa de vacunación, líder en el mundo y que ha ayudado a devolver al país recientemente a algo parecido a la normalidad, le dé a él y a sus aliados de derecha una ventaja y la mayoría estable que se le ha escapado en tres rondas anteriores de elecciones.Pero Netanyahu, primer ministro desde 2009, postula para la reelección mientras que se lleva a cabo un juicio por corrupción en su contra, una dinámica que los partidos de oposición esperan que incite a los votantes a sacarlo del poder.En realidad, sin embargo, los sondeos muestran que ninguno de los dos bloques tiene el camino despejado para ganar la mayoría, lo que hace pensar a muchos israelíes que habrá otro resultado no concluyente y, tal vez, una posible quinta elección más tarde en el año.Esto es lo que necesitas saber.¿Por qué hay tantas elecciones en Israel?La respuesta más simple es que desde 2019, ni Netanyahu ni sus opositores han logrado ganar suficientes curules en el Parlamento para formar un gobierno de colación con mayoría estable. Eso ha dejado a Netanyahu en el poder, ya como primer ministro interino o como líder de una coalición frágil con algunos de sus mayores acérrimos rivales, aunque no del todo en el poder. Y eso ha obligado al país a votar una y otra vez en un intento por superar el impasse.Detrás del drama, dicen los analistas, están las motivaciones de Netanyahu para buscar la reelección: su corazonada de que puede defenderse mejor del juicio desde la oficina de primer ministro. Dicen que está dispuesto a someter al país a una elección tras otra hasta que gane una mayoría parlamentaria más robusta que pueda concederle inmunidad.“No conozco a ningún analista serio que diga que Israel se encamina a otra ronda de elecciones por otro motivo que no sean los intereses personales de Netanyahu”, dijo Gayil Talshir, profesora de ciencia política en la Universidad Hebrea de Jerusalén.Sin embargo, los seguidores de Netanyahu rechazan la idea de que haya forzado a Israel a una elección tras otra debido a sus intereses personales. Argumentan que sus críticos simplemente están resentidos porque Netanyahu es un competidor feroz y astuto y culpan a Benny Gantz de haber logrado que la coalición resultara insostenible.Netanyahu a su salida del Parlamento de Israel en diciembreFoto de consorcio de Alex Kolomoisky¿Qué provocó esta cuarta elección?Una serie de desacuerdos entre Netanyahu y Benny Gantz, su rival y compañero de la coalición centrista, que culminaron en diciembre cuando no lograron acordar el presupuesto estatal. Eso suscitó la disolución del Parlamento, lo que ha forzado una nueva elección, aunque por ahora sigue vigente el gobierno.Los rivales habían unido fuerzas en abril pasado, luego de la tercera elección, cuando dijeron que lo hacían para asegurarse de que el país contara con un gobierno que le diera dirección a Israel durante la pandemia. Bajo este acuerdo de poder compartido, Gantz asumiría como primer ministro en noviembre de este año. Pero los socios de coalición nunca congeniaron y cada uno acusa al otro de no cooperar de buena fe.Los críticos de Netanyahu aseguran que, al disputar el presupuesto con Gantz y favorecer un plan de un año en lugar de los dos que pedía el acuerdo de la coalición, actuaba de forma interesada. La parálisis presupuestaria, al activar una nueva elección, le dio a Netanyahu otra oportunidad de formar un gobierno en lugar de quedarse en la coalición actual y cederle el poder a Gantz a finales de este año.Pero Netanyahu culpó a Gantz por el rompimiento, al decir que Gantz se había rehusado a llegar a un arreglo con Netanyahu en varios nombramientos estatales.¿Cómo se han visto afectados los israelíes por el estancamiento?La parálisis ha forzado a Israel a atravesar una de las crisis económicas y de salud más profundas de la historia sin un presupuesto público, afectando su planeación económica de largo plazo, que incluye el desarrollo de grandes proyectos de infraestructura.El estancamiento ha retrasado el nombramiento de funcionarios estatales clave, incluido el fiscal estatal y altos funcionarios de los ministerios de Justicia y Finanzas. Y los integrantes de la coalición, incluido Netanyahu, han sido acusados de politizar la toma de decisiones del gobierno incluso más de lo habitual, en busca de cualquier posible ventaja en la contienda electoral.La continua confusión, instigada por las largas dificultades legales de Netanyahu, ha moldeado la política israelí. Los votantes ahora están menos divididos por la ideología que por su rechazo o apoyo a Netanyahu.Y dado que la contienda es tan cerrada, los políticos judíos ahora están buscando cada vez más atraer a la minoría árabe de Israel para ayudar a inclinar la balanza. Los ciudadanos árabes de Israel constituyen alrededor del 20 por ciento de la población. Es un grupo que ha pasado de ser marginado a convertirse en una parte clave del electorado en esta campaña.Gideon Saar, exministro del Interior del Partido Likud de Netanyahu, es uno de sus principales competidores.Amir Cohen/Reuters¿Quiénes son los principales rivales de Netanyahu esta vez?En una demostración del modo en que el mapa político ha cambiado, dos de los principales contrincantes de Netanyahu en este ciclo electoral también son de derecha. Gideon Saar fue ministro del Interior por el partido de Netanyahu y Naftali Bennet es el exjefe de personal de Netanyahu.El tercer contendiente es Yair Lapid, un experiodista de televisión y centrista cuyo partido ha montado el desafío más fuerte contra Netanyahu.Gantz ya no es considerado como una amenaza viable al primer ministro. Las encuestas sugieren que su partido puede incluso no llegar a conseguir ningún puesto, en gran parte debido al enojo entre sus partidarios por haber formado un gobierno de unidad junto con Netanyahu, algo que había prometido no hacer.¿Cómo funcionan las elecciones en Israel?El parlamento, conocido en hebreo como la Knesset, tiene 120 curules que se reparten de manera proporcional entre los partidos que ganan más del 3,25 por ciento del voto.El sistema prácticamente garantiza que ningún partido gane una mayoría absoluta, a menudo dando a los pequeños partidos una gran influencia en las negociaciones para formar coaliciones. El sistema permite que una gran variedad de voces participe en el parlamento, pero hace que conseguir coaliciones estables sea difícil.Formar un nuevo gobierno —si se logra— puede demorar semanas o meses y en cualquier momento del proceso una mayoría de la Knesset puede votar para disolverla y forzar a una nueva elección.En los días posteriores a la elección, el presidente de Israel, Reuven Rivlin, le dará a un legislador cuatro semanas para formar la coalición. Ese mandato suele dársele al líder del partido que haya obtenido la mayor cantidad de asientos en el Parlamento, que posiblemente será Netanyahu. Pero el presidente podría dárselo a cualquier otro legislador, como Lapid, al que crea que tiene una mejor oportunidad de conseguir una coalición viable.Si los esfuerzos de dicho legislador fracasan, el presidente puede darle otras cuatro semanas a un segundo parlamentario para formar un gobierno. Si dicho proceso también naufraga, el parlamento puede nominar a un tercero para que lo intente. Si él o ella no lo logra, el Parlamento se disuelve y se celebra otra elección.Mientras tanto, Netanyahu seguirá siendo el primer ministro encargado. Si de alguna manera el impasse dura hasta noviembre, Gantz aún podría sucederlo. El acuerdo de reparto de poder al que llegaron en abril pasado quedó consagrado en la ley israelí y estipulaba que Gantz sería primer ministro en noviembre de 2021.¿Cómo ha afectado el coronavirus a la elección?En las últimas semanas, Israel ha vuelto a enviar a los niños a la escuela, reabierto los restaurantes para servicio presencial y permitido que las personas vacunadas acudan a conciertos y espectáculos teatrales.Netanyahu espera que el éxito del despliegue de vacunación en el país, que ha logrado darle a la mayoría de israelíes al menos una dosis, le dé un impulso para lograr la victoria.Pero su récord pandémico también podría costarle caro. Algunos votantes creen que ha politizado varias decisiones clave, por ejemplo al limitar algunas multas por incumplir las regulaciones para contener el virus a niveles mucho más bajos que los recomendados por los expertos en salud pública.Los críticos han percibido que esto es una forma de beneficiar a los israelíes ultraortodoxos, algunos de los cuales han incumplido las restricciones a las reuniones masivas. Netanyahu necesitará del apoyo de los israelíes ultraortodoxos para permanecer en el poder tras la elección.No se puede votar por correo en Israel. Para prevenir la propagación del virus, se han previsto lugares de votación para las personas que están en cuarentena y los pacientes con COVID-19.¿Podría haber una quinta elección este año?Nadie lo descarta. Se anticipa que el partido de Netanyahu, Likud, surja como el partido más numeroso, con alrededor de 30 curules. Pero puede que sus aliados no alcancen suficientes para darle la mayoría de 61 que necesita.Y aunque las encuestas actuales sugieren que los partidos de oposición ganarán colectivamente más de 61 curules, no está claro si sus profundas diferencias ideológicas les permitirán unirse.Podría resultar que la clave sea Bennet. Aunque desea reemplazar a Netanyahu, tampoco ha descartado unirse a su gobierno.Patrick Kingsley e Isabel Kershner colaboraron con la reportería. More

  • in

    Latest Claim in the Effort Against Aung San Suu Kyi: A Bag of Cash

    The Myanmar military’s latest accusations against the ousted civilian leader suggest a monthslong campaign to neutralize the country’s most popular politician.The Myanmar construction tycoon spoke in a faltering monotone, blinking fast and gulping occasionally for air. He said that over the past several years he had handed a total of $550,000 to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the civilian leader of Myanmar who was ousted in a military coup last month.On two occasions, he had provided $100,000 and $150,000, the businessman said in a confessional statement broadcast on a military television network Wednesday night. In the English subtitles, the money had been handed over in a “black envelope.” In Burmese, the description had him presenting the money, meant to enhance his business ties, in a paper gift bag.Either way, the envelope or gift bag would have been very large to hold that much cash.The televised statement by U Maung Weik, a military crony who was once imprisoned for drug trafficking, appears to be the latest act in an intricately planned effort to impugn Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi.Before elections in November, an online campaign amplified by pro-military groups raised a litany of unproven allegations against the civilian leader, who had shared power with the military for five years. Once her party won a landslide victory, military-linked forces stepped up their attacks on her, calling her corrupt and under the influence of foreigners.Then, after the military staged its Feb. 1 coup, security forces detained individuals who had been named months earlier as key members of a foreign plot, blessed by Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, to destabilize Myanmar. The chronology suggests a well-planned effort to rid the country of its most beloved leader.Protesters clashing with security forces in Yangon, Myanmar, on Tuesday.The New York Times“We have seen their attempt to arrest Daw Aung San Suu Kyi since before the election,” said U Khin Maung Zaw, her lawyer. He has not been able to see his client nor has he been given power of attorney so he can formally handle her legal affairs.Days before the November polls, the coordinated attacks on social media accused Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi and her governing National League for Democracy of illegally profiting from foreign funding. If the National League for Democracy is found guilty of having been tainted by foreign influence, the party could be disbanded, neutralizing the most popular political force in Myanmar’s history.The targeted campaign — disseminated on Facebook, YouTube, a custom-built website and spoofed emails that shared similar branding and cross-posting — implied that a cabal of Western interests was working with the National League for Democracy to steal the elections and upend Myanmar governance. The custom-built website was developed from a folder named after the military’s proxy party, a digital forensics investigation found.Chief among the supposed plotters was George Soros, the American philanthropist whose Open Society Foundation promotes democracy worldwide.One of the pre-election posts claimed that the Daw Khin Kyi Foundation, a charity group set up in the name of Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s mother, was secretly working with the Open Society Foundation to destabilize Myanmar.The implications of the social media attack became clearer this month. Mr. Maung Weik, the construction tycoon, claimed in the television broadcast on Wednesday that he had donated money to the charity. Last week, the military accused Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi of having siphoned off some money from the Daw Khin Kyi Foundation. At least two of the charity’s employees have been detained in recent weeks.On Monday, the same military-controlled television network that broadcast Mr. Maung Weik’s statement announced that arrest warrants had been issued for 11 employees of Open Society Myanmar for aiding the anti-coup protest movement with, among other things, illegal bank transactions. The group’s finance manager has been detained.Volunteer medical doctors operate on an 18-year-old protestor wounded during a crackdown in Yangon, Wednesday.The New York TimesOpen Society Myanmar has denied that it acted illegally by withdrawing funds from its own local bank account.Another pre-election social media attack pointed fingers at a deputy industry minister, a deputy finance minister and an Australian economic adviser to Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, reproaching them for machinations to control the country. After the military ousted the civilian government last month, all three were detained.The military’s takeover of power has galvanized tremendous pushback from the people of Myanmar. Since the coup, millions of people have demonstrated and participated in labor strikes against the regime.The military has responded with the kind of violence normally reserved for the battlefield. In attacks on protesters, security forces have killed at least 215 people, mostly by gunshot, according to a local group that tallies political imprisonments and deaths; more than 2,000 people have been detained for political reasons since the coup.This week, members of a group representing the disbanded Parliament were charged with high treason. So was Myanmar’s envoy to the United Nations, who gave an impassioned speech last month decrying the military’s seizure of power.On Wednesday, the last of Myanmar’s major independent newspapers ceased publication. More than 30 journalists have been detained or pursued by authorities since the coup. The country, for decades under the military’s fist, is rapidly losing whatever democratic reforms had been introduced over the past few years.Protesters building a roadblock on a bridge, Yangon, on Tuesday.The New York TimesSince Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi was locked up in a pre-dawn raid on the day of the coup, she has been formally charged with various crimes that could see her imprisoned for years. The charges include esoteric crimes such as illegally importing foreign walkie-talkies and contravening coronavirus regulations.Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi has not yet been charged in relation to Mr. Maung Weik’s accusations that he gave her money to better his business relationship with the civilian government. The military television network said that investigators were currently looking into the case.Last week, the military also accused her of illegally accepting 25 pounds of gold and about $600,000. Mr. Maung Weik’s accusations of money transfers are separate from this figure.If charges are brought in any such cases, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, 75, could face life imprisonment.“I 100 percent believe that their accusations against Daw Aung San Suu Kyi are groundless,” said U Aung Kyi Nyunt, a spokesman for the National League for Democracy.Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s popularity in Myanmar far outstrips that of the generals who have controlled the country for most of the past 60 years. She spent 15 years under house arrest and won the Nobel Peace Prize for her commitment to nonviolent resistance.While her international reputation faded after she defended the military’s ethnic cleansing campaign against Rohingya Muslims, her star appeal endured at home. The National League for Democracy’s electoral performance last year bested its 2015 landslide. The military has called fraud on the polls.Mr. Khin Maung Zaw, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s lawyer, said that by silencing and imprisoning her the military regime risked burnishing her popularity further.“They should not let Daw Aung San Suu Kyi change from a hero to a martyr,” he said. “If Daw Aung San Suu Kyi becomes a martyr, then the strength of the people will never be destroyed, and her martyrdom will become the people’s greatest strength.”A Yangon neighborhood after clashes on Tuesday.The New York Times More

  • in

    Dutch Prime Minister in Line for 4th Term Following Victory for ‘Center-Right’

    Mark Rutte’s party convincingly won the Dutch elections. But wins by liberal-democrats can force him to compromise on his critical European stances.LEIDEN, the Netherlands — Mark Rutte, one of Europe’s longest-serving leaders, saw his Party for Freedom and Democracy win big in Dutch elections on Wednesday, setting him up for a fourth term as prime minister of the Netherlands.“We have to bring this country back to where it should be, as one of the best performing countries in the world,” Mr. Rutte said in a televised victory speech. “I have enough energy for even 10 more years.”Mr. Rutte, who describes his party as “center-right,” must now form a coalition with other parties to obtain a majority in Parliament. D66, a liberal-democratic party led by the former United Nations diplomat Sigrid Kaag, came in second. Mr. Rutte and Ms. Kaag are set to lead talks over forming a new government.Mr. Rutte’s party gained three seats as compared with similar elections in 2017, according to exit polls published by the public broadcaster NOS on WednesdayMr. Rutte and his cabinet had resigned in January over a scandal involving the tax authorities’ targeting of people, mostly poor, who had made administrative mistakes in their requests for child benefits. Many were ruined financially after being forced to pay back benefits to which they had been entitled.The scandal did not play a significant role during the campaign, however, nor did Mr. Rutte’s wavering polices for dealing with the coronavirus. He and his cabinet stayed on in a caretaker role until the election in order to manage the pandemic response.“This has been a corona election, and most of those in power have been rewarded,” said Tom-Jan Meeus, a political columnist for NRC Handelsblad. He said the dispersed wins by several right-wing parties combined did not go beyond their usual threshold of about 18 percent.“These elections are a victory for parties in the political middle, no change for the radical right and a loss for the left,” he added.Mr. Meeus said that he did not expect big shifts in policy, “but there will be more pressure on Mark Rutte to have more pro-European policies, from the parties he has to govern with.”Ms. Kaag, a career diplomat who speaks multiple languages including Arabic, is a staunch supporter of the European Union, as is her party. She served in the outgoing cabinet as minister of international trade and development.Last May, Mr. Rutte led a group of nations that refused blank-check payments for southern European countries to support their economies during the pandemic. He will now be forced to compromise on such stances if he enters into a coalition with D66.Voters in the Netherlands had cast their ballots in one of the first major European elections to take place during the coronavirus pandemic that has swept across the continent in successive waves.Neighboring Germany is also entering a packed election season, with national and state votes coming in a year that will bring to an end the 16-year chancellorship of Angela Merkel.Geert Wilders, a populist who has opposed immigration from Muslim countries and called for a ban of the Quran, saw his Party for Freedom lose two seats, though it remained the third largest.Another right-wing party, the Forum voor Democratie, led by Thierry Baudet, at the height of its popularity appeared ready to win 26 seats, according to opinion polls taken in 2019, but public infighting led some prominent politicians to leave and start their own party. Mr. Baudet’s party won six new seats for a total of eight, according to exit polls late Wednesday.The elections are among of the first to take place in Europe since the coronavirus broke out last spring, sparking repeated lockdowns across the continent as the death toll grew. Portugal voted in presidential elections in January, re-electing the center-right Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa for a second term in office.The pandemic has changed the usual dynamic of organizing elections in the Netherlands, but did not seem to affect turnout on Wednesday. Long lines of socially distanced voters stood waiting in the early afternoon in the historical center of Leiden, a university town near The Hague. At many polling stations voters were allowed to take home the red pencils they used to cast their ballots, a measure to help prevent the virus from spreading.“There is no way anyone can get corona with all these measures,” said Niels Romijn, a civil servant, as he entered a public library to cast his ballot. “Everybody was super chill,” he said, happily showing off his free red pencil. “Civil duty,” he said with a laugh.Polling stations had been open nationwide since Monday to allow vulnerable voters to avoid crowds. Voters over 70 were encouraged to vote by mail. And campaigning mainly took place on television, making it hard for voters to spontaneously confront politicians as is typical practice in the Netherlands.A temporary polling station in the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam.Jeroen Jumelet/EPA, via ShutterstockCoronavirus cases are once again surging in the Netherlands, prompting the authorities to warn of a third wave. Last year, it took Mr. Rutte’s government until November to ramp up testing, and now, the vaccination process has been advancing slowly.However, local issues, not the government’s handling of the coronavirus, dominated the election campaign.Broader policies put forward by Mr. Rutte, who has been in power since 2010, were also a focus on the campaign trail, with opponents questioning his government’s repeated cutbacks in health care, policing and other essential services.Mr. Rutte has ruled out any form of cooperation with Mr. Wilders’ Freedom Party, meaning that he will likely have to engage with other parties. Wednesday’s vote brings a record of 17 parties to the 150-seat Dutch parliament. More

  • in

    Israel Has Its 4th National Election in 2 Years. Here’s Why.

    Israelis will vote again on Tuesday, seeking to end a political deadlock that has gripped the country for two years. This is what you need to know.JERUSALEM — Israelis head to the polls on Tuesday for the fourth time in two years, hoping to break a seemingly endless cycle of elections and a political deadlock that has left the country without a national budget during a pandemic.Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hopes Israel’s world-leading vaccination program, which has helped the country emerge in recent days into something approaching normality, will give him and his right-wing allies an edge and the stable majority that proved elusive in three earlier rounds of elections.But Mr. Netanyahu, prime minister since 2009, is running for re-election while standing trial on corruption charges — a dynamic that opposition parties hope will prompt voters to finally push him out of office.In reality, though, polls show that neither bloc has a clear route to a majority, leaving many Israelis bracing for another inconclusive result, and a possible fifth election later in the year.Here’s what else you need to know.Why is Israel holding so many elections?The simplest explanation is that since 2019, neither Mr. Netanyahu nor his opponents have been able to win enough seats in Parliament to form a coalition government with a stable majority. That has left Mr. Netanyahu in office, either as a caretaker prime minister or at the helm of a fragile coalition with some of his fiercest rivals, though not wholly in power. And that has forced the country to vote again and again in an attempt to break the deadlock.Underlying this drama, analysts say, is one of Mr. Netanyahu’s motivations for seeking re-election — his hunch that he can best fight his prosecution from the prime minister’s office. They say he is ready to take the country to election after election — until he wins a stronger parliamentary majority that could grant him immunity from prosecution.“I don’t know any serious thinker who says Israel is going to another round of elections for reasons other than Netanyahu’s personal interests,” said Gayil Talshir, a professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.Supporters of Mr. Netanyahu, however, reject the notion that his personal interests have pushed Israel from election to election. They contend that his critics simply resent that Mr. Netanyahu is a fierce and savvy competitor, and they blame Mr. Gantz for making the coalition untenable..Mr. Netanyahu leaving the Israeli Parliament in December.Pool photo by Alex KolomoiskyWhat prompted this fourth election?A series of disagreements between Mr. Netanyahu and Benny Gantz, his rival and centrist coalition partner, culminated in December in their failure to agree on a state budget. That led the Parliament to dissolve, forcing a new election, though for now the government remains in place.The rivals joined forces last April, after the third election, saying that it was to ensure Israel had a government to lead the country through the pandemic. Under their power-sharing agreement, Mr. Gantz would take over as prime minister in November of this year. But the coalition partners never got along, and each side accuses the other of failing to cooperate in good faith.Mr. Netanyahu’s critics contend that he acted out of personal interest when he fought Mr. Gantz over the budget, favoring a one-year plan, rather than the two years called for by the coalition agreement. The budget deadlock, by forcing a new election, gave Mr. Netanyahu another shot at forming a government, rather than staying in the current coalition and ceding power to Mr. Gantz later this year.But Mr. Netanyahu blamed Mr. Gantz for the break, saying that Mr. Gantz had refused to compromise with Mr. Netanyahu on several state appointments.How has the political gridlock affected Israelis?The gridlock has forced Israel to go without a state budget during one of the most profound health and economic crises in its history, undermining long-term economic planning, including the development of major infrastructure projects.The stasis has delayed the appointment of key state officials, including the state attorney and senior executive officers at the Justice and Finance ministries. And members of the coalition, including Mr. Netanyahu, have been accused of politicizing government decision-making even more than usual, seeking any possible edge in the electoral advantage.The continual turmoil, abetted by Mr. Netanyahu’s long-running legal troubles, has reshaped Israeli politics. Voters are now divided less by ideology than by whether they are for or against Mr. Netanyahu.And with the race so tight, Jewish politicians are now increasingly looking to members of Israel’s Arab minority to help break the deadlock. Arab citizens of Israel form about 20 percent of the population. Once marginalized, they have become a key constituency in this election campaign.Gideon Saar, a former interior minister for Mr. Netanyahu’s Likud party, is one of his primary challengers.Amir Cohen/ReutersWho are Mr. Netanyahu’s main rivals this time?In a sign of how the political map has changed, two of Mr. Netanyahu’s principal challengers in this election cycle are also right-wingers. Gideon Saar is a former interior minister for Mr. Netanyahu’s party and Naftali Bennett is Mr. Netanyahu’s former chief of staff. The third leading challenger is Yair Lapid, a centrist former broadcast journalist whose party is mounting the strongest challenge to Mr. Netanyahu.Mr. Gantz is no longer considered a viable threat to the prime minister. Polls suggest his party may even fail to win a seat, largely because of anger among his former supporters over his decision to form a unity government with Mr. Netanyahu in the first place, an arrangement he had promised not to join.How do Israeli elections work?The Parliament, known in Hebrew as the Knesset, has 120 seats that are allocated on a proportional basis to parties that win more than 3.25 percent of the vote.The system almost guarantees that no single party will win an outright majority, often giving tiny parties big influence in the deal-making that forms coalitions. The system allows for a broad range of voices in Parliament but forming stable coalitions under it is difficult.It could take weeks or possibly months for a new government to be formed — if one can be formed — and at any point in the process, a majority of the Knesset could vote to dissolve again, forcing yet another election.In the days after the election, Reuven Rivlin, Israel’s president, will give one lawmaker four weeks to try to form a coalition. He usually gives that mandate to the leader of the party that won the highest number of seats, which is likely to be Mr. Netanyahu. But he could grant it to another lawmaker, like Mr. Lapid, who he believes has a better chance at pulling together a viable coalition.If that lawmaker’s efforts break down, the president can give a second candidate another four weeks to form a government. If that process also stutters, Parliament itself can nominate a third candidate to give it a go. And if he or she fails, Parliament dissolves and another election is called.In the meantime, Mr. Netanyahu will remain caretaker prime minister. If somehow the deadlock continues until November, Mr. Gantz might still succeed him. The power-sharing deal the pair agreed to last April was enshrined into Israeli law, and stipulated that Mr. Gantz would become prime minister in November 2021.How has the coronavirus affected the election?In recent weeks, Israel has sent children back to school, reopened restaurants for in-house dining and allowed vaccinated people to attend concerts and theater performances.Mr. Netanyahu hopes the success of Israel’s vaccine rollout, which has given a majority of Israelis at least one dose, will help propel him to victory.But his pandemic record may also cost him. Some voters believe he politicized certain key decisions — for instance, capping some fines for flouting antivirus regulations at levels much lower than public health experts recommended.Critics perceived this as a sop to ultra-Orthodox Israelis, some of whom flouted coronavirus restrictions on mass gatherings. Mr. Netanyahu will need the support of two ultra-Orthodox parties to remain in office after the election.Voting by mail is not available in Israel. To prevent the spread of the virus, special polling stations are being set up for quarantined people and for Covid-19 patients.Could there be a fifth election later in the year?No one is ruling it out. Mr. Netanyahu’s party, Likud, is predicted to emerge as the largest party, with around 30 seats. But his allies may not win enough seats to give him a majority of 61.And though current polling suggests the opposition parties will collectively win more than 61 seats, it’s unclear whether their profound ideological differences will allow them to come together.The key player could be Mr. Bennett. Though he wants to replace Mr. Netanyahu, he has also not ruled out joining his government.Patrick Kingsley and Isabel Kershner contributed reporting. More

  • in

    What’s Missing in Israel’s Election? Biden.

    But that may not be a good sign after all.On March 23, Israel will go to the polls for its fourth national election in two years. The worst part is that this depressing Election Day may just be a prelude to yet another: Opinion polling suggests that Israel’s political blocs will struggle to elect and form a stable parliamentary majority. Our politics, it seems, are stuck on a repetitive doom loop.At least one thing is different: This time, the American president is a nonentity.Consider two election cycles of the last decade. In 2015, just days before Israelis voted, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington and spoke before Congress about the threat of Iran. Mr. Netanyahu made his fierce opposition to President Barack Obama and his Iran deal central to his campaign. Four years later, when Israel entered its current long cycle of repeated elections, Mr. Netanyahu posted his image alongside that of President Donald Trump on a high-rise overlooking Tel Aviv’s main highway. This time his goal was making America a central feature of his campaign, by highlighting his closeness to the president. In both cases, the political messaging was spot-on.Mr. Netanyahu was hardly the first Israeli politician to make America’s president an electoral issue. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was helped by President George W. Bush. Prime Minister Ehud Barak was elected with the backing of President Bill Clinton’s administration.Why are American presidents so central to elections in a country so far away from Washington? First, because Israelis see the United States as a cornerstone of their country’s security. And while Israelis’ confidence in the alliance has somewhat eroded in recent years, the ability of their leaders to understand, debate and confront the leaders in Washington is still important. Second, what happens in Israel also matters to America; Israeli politics are also part of Washington’s strategy for the Middle East.But in the lead-up to this month’s election, there has been neither an embrace of President Biden nor a repudiation of him. And that’s not for a lack of opportunity. Nearly four weeks passed between Mr. Biden’s inauguration and his first call to Israel’s prime minister. That was viewed by many as a snub. But when Mr. Netanyahu was asked this month why Mr. Biden was so late to call him, the prime minister didn’t try to convince the voters that in fact, Mr. Biden was his best friend; nor did he try to claim that Mr. Biden was a great foe who threatened Israel’s security. He dismissed the question with a few generalities and moved on.Mr. Netanyahu’s main rivals, Yair Lapid, Naftali Bannett and Gideon Saar, have also been hesitant to seize on the issue, or on early signs of disagreement between Washington and Israel over Iran as proof that the prime minister is not fit to keep Israel secure.There’s a simple explanation, and a more complicated one, for this unusual absence. First, the simple: Israelis do not yet know whether Mr. Biden will prove to be a friend, like his predecessor, or a thorn in their side, like the president he previously served under. Mr. Netanyahu cannot yet oppose him because so far he has done nothing objectionable, and alienating the White House for no good reason is beyond the pale even for a cynic like Mr. Netanyahu. The opposite is also true: Mr. Biden has not yet proved himself to be Israel’s friend as president, and so the prime minister’s rivals must be careful not to portray themselves as his admirers.The more complicated explanation concerns America’s interest in the Middle East and the country’s relative irrelevance to much that is happening in the region. The United States was unsuccessful in its halfhearted quest to contain Iranian expansion; it was missing in action in the Syrian civil war; it bet on wrong horses during the so-called Arab Spring; it has alienated the Saudis, let Russia take over Libya and did nothing of value to resolve the Palestinian issue. The list goes on.In fact, the only true achievement of the United States in the region in recent years is the Abraham Accords, the normalization agreement between Israel and the Gulf Arab countries, which was orchestrated by the Trump administration. But this significant move was achieved not as a triumph of the traditional American policy but because American diplomacy was on leave — temporarily occupied by the revolutionary troops of the Trump administration.If America’s leaders are just tired of being involved in Israel’s never-ending political process, I can’t fully blame them. We Israelis are all tired of it, too. We would all wish for a little break. And yet, an Israeli election with no America as a background noise is disturbingly strange. Is this another proof that America is less interested in the country that much depends on its support? Are we being demoted?In more than one way, the policy of the Biden administration seems to be moving along a trajectory that assumes a less central role for Middle East affairs in America’s foreign policy. So it’s quite possible that Israel’s needs are becoming less urgent and that who leads Israel matters less in the eyes of the United States. In such case, the proper election question for Israelis is no longer “Which leader could better deal with America?” but “Which leader can better manage without America?”Shmuel Rosner (@rosnersdomain) is the editor of the Israeli data-journalism site TheMadad.com, a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute and a contributing opinion writer.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Can France’s Far Right Win Over the ‘Beavers’? One Mayor Shows How

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyCan France’s Far Right Win Over the ‘Beavers’? One Mayor Shows HowIn the southern city of Perpignan, voters who had long built a dam against the far right turned in the last election. Some wonder whether it’s a harbinger of things to come.Last year Perpignan became the largest city to come under the control of the National Rally, the far-right party led by Marine Le Pen.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesNorimitsu Onishi and March 13, 2021, 5:28 a.m. ETLire en françaisPERPIGNAN, France — Riding high in the polls ahead of the next presidential election, feeling they’ve won the battle over ideas, smelling blood in the Élysée Palace, leaders of France’s far right cocked their eyes across the land at perhaps the one thing standing between them and power: beavers.That is what some French call the voters who, time and again, have cast political differences aside and put in power anyone but far-right candidates — raising a dam against them as real beavers do against predators. Voters did precisely that in 2014 in Perpignan, a medieval city of pastel-color buildings on the Mediterranean near the border with Spain.But last year, the dam broke and Perpignan became the largest city under the control of the National Rally, the far-right party led by Marine Le Pen. Today the city of more than 120,000 is being closely watched as an incubator of far-right strategy and as a potential harbinger of what a presidential election rematch pitting Ms. Le Pen against President Emmanuel Macron could look like.A victory for Ms. Le Pen would be earth-shattering for France, and all of Europe. It has been an article of faith in France that a party whose leadership has long shown flashes of anti-Semitism, Nazi nostalgia and anti-immigrant bigotry would never make it through the country’s two-stage presidential electoral juggernaut.But steadily her party has advanced farther than many French have been prepared to countenance, and Ms. Le Pen’s debut in the final round of France’s last presidential election in 2017 came as a shock to the system.She may still be a relative long shot, given the party’s history in France, but for now perhaps not as long as she once was. Recent polls show her matching Mr. Macron in the first round of next year’s presidential contest and trailing by a few points in a second-round runoff. In a poll released Thursday, 48 percent of respondents said Ms. Le Pen would probably be France’s next president, up 7 percent compared with half a year ago.“They’ve been forming dams since 2002 now,” said Louis Aliot, the mayor of Perpignan and a longtime National Rally leader. “So to ask them again to form a dam with Macron — but what’s changed? Nothing at all.” Voter-built dams were no longer effective, unlike those made by the animal, he said, adding, “When beavers build dams, it works.”The mayor of Perpignan, Louis Aliot, succeeded in softening the party’s image in Perpignan.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesIn 2014, many voters on the left and right had successfully united in a “Republican front” against Mr. Aliot — the same way they raised a dam against Ms. Le Pen in the 2017 presidential election won by Mr. Macron.But in the intervening years, Mr. Aliot succeeded in softening the party’s image in Perpignan and won new converts, even as disillusioned beavers stayed home or left blank ballots on voting day in 2020. Mr. Aliot won handily — in a rematch against his opponent of 2014 who, like Mr. Macron, had tilted rightward and marketed himself as the best check against the far right.Nationally, Ms. Le Pen, who was Mr. Aliot’s common-law partner for a decade until 2019, has hewed to the same playbook in sanitizing her party’s image, even amid questions about the depth and sincerity of those efforts.She has softened the party’s longtime populist economic agenda — for instance, by dropping a proposal to exit the euro and by promoting green reindustrialization — while holding onto or even toughening the party’s core, hard-line positions on immigration, Islam and security.The effort by the party to wade into the mainstream has presented a special quandary for Mr. Macron. Sensing the political threat, and lacking a real challenge on his left, he has tried to fight the National Rally on its own turf — moving to the right to vie for voters who might be tempted to defect to it. Doing so, Mr. Macron hopes to keep the far right at bay.But the shift also helps destigmatize the far right, or at least many of its messages, argue National Rally leaders, some members of Mr. Macron’s own party and political analysts. Mr. Macron’s strategy may have the unintended consequence of helping the National Rally in its decades-long struggle to become a normal party, they say. “It legitimizes what we’ve been saying,” Mr. Aliot said. “These are the people who’ve been saying for 30 years: Be careful, they’re nasty, they’re fascists, because they target Muslims. All of a sudden, they’re talking like us.”Mr. Macron and his ministers, in recent months, have tried to appropriate the extreme right’s issues with new policies and dog whistles, talking tough on crime and pushing through security bills to try to limit filming of the police, which was dropped after protests, and crack down on what they call Islamist separatism. In a recent televised debate, the interior minister, Gérald Darmanin, even accused Ms. Le Pen of being “shaky” and “softer than we are” on Islamism.President Emmanuel Macron has tried to fight the National Rally on its own turf — moving to the right to vie for voters who might be tempted to defect to it.Credit…Pool photo by Thomas CoexMarine Le Pen has been sanitizing her party’s image, even amid questions about the depth and sincerity of those efforts.Credit…Alain Jocard/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThey have turned to identity politics, ordering an investigation into “Islamo-leftism” at French universities and other so-called American-inspired ideas that they say threaten to undermine French values.“The more we go on their ground, the stronger we make them,” Jean-Michel Mis, a national lawmaker from Mr. Macron’s party, said of the National Rally. “So their leaders are very pleased because, in the end, we’re legitimizing their campaign themes.”Nicolas Lebourg, a political scientist specializing on the National Rally, said that adopting the far right’s themes has often backfired. “What they’re currently doing is campaigning for Marine Le Pen,” he said.Even as Mr. Macron has portrayed himself as the best candidate to protect France from the far right, polls show voters may be growing weary of being asked to vote against a candidate, rather than for one.Among the former beavers of Perpignan were Jacques and Régine Talau, a retired couple who had always voted for the mainstream right, helping build the dam against the far right in Perpignan in 2014 and in the presidential election of 2017.Historically conservative and economically depressed, Perpignan was perhaps naturally receptive to Ms. Le Pen’s party, which had won smaller, struggling cities in the south and north in recent years. But winning over the Talaus of Perpignan was a tipping point.Their neighborhood, Mas Llaro, an area of stately homes on large plots amid vineyards on the city’s eastern fringe, is Perpignan’s wealthiest. In 2020, more than 60 percent of its residents voted for Mr. Aliot — 7 percentage points higher than his overall tally and 10 percentage points more than in 2014.Among the former “beavers” of Perpignan were Jacques Talau, left, and his wife, Régine, center, a retired couple who had always voted for the mainstream right.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesMas Llaro had always voted for the mainstream right.But disillusioned and weary of the status quo, the Talaus, like many others, voted for the first time for the far right last year, drawn by Mr. Aliot’s emphasis on cleanliness and crime, saying their home had been broken into twice.Though satisfied with the mayor’s performance, Mr. Talau said he would still join the dam against the far right in next year’s presidential contest and hold his nose to vote for Mr. Macron. But Ms. Talau was now considering casting a ballot for Ms. Le Pen.“She’s put water in her wine,” Ms. Talau said, adding that Mr. Macron was not “tough enough.”Mr. Aliot’s opponent in 2014 and 2020, a center-right politician named Jean-Marc Pujol, had pressed further to the right in an unsuccessful move to fend off the far right. He increased the number of police officers, giving Perpignan the highest number per capita of any large city in France, according to government data.Even so, many of his core supporters appeared to trust the far right more on crime and still defected, while many left-leaning beavers complained that they had been ignored and refused to take part in dam-building again, said Agnès Langevine, who represented the Greens and the Socialists in the 2020 mayoral election.“And they told us, ‘In 2022, if it’s between Macron and Le Pen, I won’t do it again,’ ” she added.Mr. Lebourg, the political scientist, said that Mr. Aliot had also won over conservative, upper-income voters by adopting a mainstream economic message — the same strategy adopted by Ms. Le Pen.Since taking over the party a decade ago, she has worked hard at “dédiabolisation” — or “de-demonizing” — the party.A war memorial in Perpignan, a conservative and economically depressed city that has been receptive to the National Rally party’s message.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesIn 2015, Ms. Le Pen expelled her own father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who founded the party and had a long history of playing down the Holocaust.While she popularized dog whistles like “turning savage,” she consciously stayed clear of explosive language conjuring up a supposed “great replacement” of France’s white population by African and Muslim immigrants. In 2018, she rebranded the National Front as the more inclusive “Rally.”Still, the party wants to toughen migration policies for foreign students and reduce net immigration by twentyfold.It also wants to ban the public wearing of the Muslim veil and limit the “presence of ostentatious elements” outside religious buildings if they clash with the environment, in an apparent reference to minarets.In Perpignan, Mr. Aliot has focused on crime, spending $9.5 million to hire 30 new police officers, open new stations, and set up bicycle and nighttime patrols, responding to an increase in drug trafficking.Jeanne Mercier, 24, a left-leaning voter, said many around her had been “seduced” by the far-right mayor.Camille Rosa, left, a left-leaning voter, said she doesn’t know whether she would join again in building a dam against Ms. Le Pen in presidential elections next year.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York Times“We’re the test to show France that the National Front is making things work and that people are rallying and are happy,” she said, referring to the party by its old name. “In the end, it’s not the devil that we imagined.”Camille Rosa, 35, said she doesn’t know whether she would join again in building a dam against Ms. Le Pen next year. The attacks by the president’s ministers against “Islamo-leftism” and scholars on feminism, gender and race had fundamentally changed her view of the government of Mr. Macron.“I have the impression that their enemies are no longer the extreme right at all,” she said, “but it’s us, people on the left.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    À Perpignan, l’extrême-droite rallie ‘les castors’

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyÀ Perpignan, l’extrême-droite rallie ‘les castors’Dans cette ville méridionale, des électeurs qui avaient longtemps fait barrage à l’extrême-droite ont basculé aux dernières municipales. Un signe avant-coureur pour la prochaine présidentielle?Perpignan est devenue l’an dernier la plus grande ville de France à passer sous contrôle  du Rassemblement National, le parti d’extrême-droite dirigé par Marine Le Pen.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesNorimitsu Onishi and March 13, 2021, 5:28 a.m. ETRead in EnglishPERPIGNAN, France — Forts de bons sondages en amont de la prochaine élection présidentielle, estimant avoir gagné la bataille des idées et sentant le vent tourner à l’Élysée, les leaders de l’extrême-droite française n’ont peut-être plus qu’un obstacle entre eux et le pouvoir: les castors.C’est ainsi que certains en France surnomment ceux qui, d’un scrutin à l’autre, laissant de côté leurs différences politiques, choisissent d’élire n’importe qui plutôt que les candidats d’extrême-droite — érigeant un barrage contre ces derniers comme le font les vrais castors pour se protéger des prédateurs. C’est précisément ce qu’ont fait, aux municipales de 2014, les électeurs de Perpignan, cette ville médiévale méditerranéenne aux bâtisses couleur pastel située non loin de la frontière espagnole.Mais l’année dernière le barrage a cédé, et Perpignan est devenue la plus grande ville à passer sous contrôle du Rassemblement National d’extrême-droite que dirige Marine Le Pen. Aujourd’hui, cette ville de plus de 120 000 habitants est scrutée avec attention : elle est un incubateur de la stratégie de l’extrême-droite et un potentiel signe avant-coureur de ce à quoi pourrait ressembler le deuxième match présidentiel opposant Marine Le Pen à Emmanuel Macron.Une victoire de Mme Le Pen bouleverserait la France et l’Europe entière. Il a longtemps été considéré comme un principe acquis qu’un parti dont la direction a montré des signes d’antisémitisme, de nostalgie du nazisme et d’intolérance anti-immigrés n’arriverait jamais à remporter l’élection présidentielle.Mais petit à petit, son parti a progressé bien plus que beaucoup de Français n’étaient prêts à l’admettre. L’arrivée de Mme Le Pen au second tour de la dernière présidentielle française, en 2017, a été un électrochoc pour le système.Son combat est loin d’être gagné, vu l’historique de son parti en France, mais peut–être s’est-elle rapprochée de la ligne d’arrivée. Un sondage récent lui attribue un score égal à celui de M. Macron au premier tour de l’élection présidentielle de l’année prochaine, et une défaite par quelques points seulement au second. D’après un sondage publié jeudi dernier, 48% des Français estiment probable la victoire de Marine Le Pen à la présidentielle, soit 7% de plus qu’il y a six mois.“Ils ont fait barrage depuis 2002 maintenant”, dit Louis Aliot, maire de Perpignan et cacique de longue date du Rassemblement National. “Alors leur redemander de faire barrage avec Macron, mais qu’est-ce qui a changé? Rien du tout.” Les barrages des électeurs ne sont plus efficaces, contrairement à ceux de l’animal, estime-t-il. “Les castors, quand ils construisent des barrages, ça marche.”Le maire de Perpignan, Louis Aliot, a réussi à modérer l’image de son parti  à Perpignan.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesEn 2014, de nombreux électeurs de gauche comme de droite avaient formé avec succès un “front républicain” contre M. Aliot — de la même manière qu’ils avaient fait barrage à Mme Le Pen pour l’élection présidentielle de 2017 remportée par M. Macron.Mais depuis lors, M. Aliot a réussi à adoucir l’image du parti à Perpignan et à convertir de nouveaux électeurs, tandis que certains castors désabusés sont restés chez eux ou ont voté blanc le jour de l’élection en 2020. M. Aliot a gagné haut la main — une forme de revanche contre le même adversaire qu’en 2014 qui, comme M. Macron, avait viré à droite et s’était présenté comme le meilleur rempart contre l’extrême-droite.À l’échelle nationale, Mme Le Pen, qui fut pendant dix ans, jusqu’en 2019, la partenaire au civil de M. Aliot, adopte la même tactique d’assainissement de l’image de son parti, même si des questions demeurent quant à la réalité et la sincérité de ses efforts.Elle a modéré le programme économique longtemps populiste de son parti — en renonçant par exemple à la proposition d’abandonner l’euro et en promouvant la réindustrialisation verte — tout en perpétuant, voire en durcissant, les positions-clés et fermes du parti sur l’immigration, l’islam et la sécurité.Les efforts que déploie le parti pour se fondre dans les courants politiques traditionnels mettent M. Macron face à un dilemme. Sentant le danger politique à droite et sans réel challenger à sa gauche, il tente de combattre le Rassemblement National sur son propre terrain — en opérant un glissement vers la droite pour disputer à ce dernier les électeurs tentés de changer de camp. Ce faisant, M. Macron espère tenir l’extrême-droite à distance.Mais ce changement a aussi contribué à destigmatiser l’extrême-droite, tout du moins nombre de ses propositions, selon les leaders du Rassemblement National, des membres du propre parti de M. Macron, et des politologues. La stratégie de M. Macron pourrait avoir la conséquence imprévue d’aider le Rassemblement National dans son combat de plusieurs décennies pour devenir un parti normal, préviennent-ils.“Ça légitime ce qu’on dit”, dit M Aliot. “C’est des gens qui vous ont dit pendant 30 ans : attention, ceux-là ils sont méchants, ce sont des fachos, parce qu’ils s’en prennent aux musulmans. Tout d’un coup ils parlent comme nous.”Ces derniers mois, M. Macron et ses ministres ont tenté de s’approprier des thèmes chers à l’extrême-droite au moyen de politiques et d’expressions nouvelles. Ils ont adopté une posture ferme sur la criminalité, proposé des lois pour limiter la diffusion des images de policiers — abandonnées suite à des manifestations — et sévi sur ce qu’ils nomment le séparatisme islamiste. Lors d’un récent débat télévisé face à Marine Le Pen, le ministre de l’Intérieur Gérald Darmanin accusait celle-ci d’être “branlante” et “plus molle” sur l’islamisme que le gouvernement.Emmanuel Macron entreprend de combattre le Rassemblement National sur son propre terrain — glissant vers la droite pour disputer à ce dernier les électeurs tentés de faire défection.Credit…Pool photo by Thomas CoexMarine Le Pen tente d’assainissement l’image de son parti, même si des questions demeurent quant à la réalité et la sincérité de ses efforts.Credit…Alain Jocard/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIls ont adopté une stratégie identitaire, commandant une enquête sur “l’islamo-gauchisme” dans les universités françaises et d’autres idées supposées d’inspiration américaine qu’ils accusent de saper les valeurs françaises.“Plus on va sur leur terrain, plus on les renforce”, estime Jean-Michel Mis, un député de La République En Marche, au sujet du Rassemblement National. “Donc leurs dirigeants sont très contents parce que finalement on légitime leurs thèmes de campagne.”Pour Nicolas Lebourg, un politologue spécialiste du Rassemblement National, l’adoption des thèmes de l’extrême-droite est souvent contre-productive. “Ce qu’ils sont en train de faire, c’est faire la campagne de Marine Le Pen,” explique-t-il.Alors que M. Macron se présente comme le meilleur candidat pour protéger la France de l’extrême-droite, les sondages démontrent que les électeurs sont de plus en plus las d’être toujours appelés à voter contre, plutôt que pour, un candidat.Jacques et Régine Talau comptent parmi les anciens castors de Perpignan. Ce couple de retraités avait toujours voté pour la droite classique et avait contribué au barrage contre l’extrême-droite lors des municipales de 2014, puis des élections présidentielles de 2017.Historiquement à droite et en proie aux difficultés économiques, Perpignan était sans doute un terrain naturel pour le parti de Mme Le Pen qui, ces dernières années, avait remporté de petites villes sinistrées dans le sud et le nord du pays. Mais le ralliement du couple Talau a marqué un tournant.Leur quartier, le Mas Llaro, une succession de demeures cossues construites sur de larges parcelles au milieu des vignobles, à la périphérie est de la ville, est la plus riche de Perpignan. En 2020, plus de 60% de ses résidents ont voté pour M Aliot — 7 points de plus que sa moyenne dans la ville et 10 de plus qu’en 2014.Parmi les anciens castors de Perpignan, il y a Jacques Talau, à gauche, et sa femme Régine, des retraités qui votaient toujours pour la droite classique.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesLe Mas Llaro a toujours voté pour la droite traditionnelle.Mais, désabusés et lassés du statu quo, les Talaus, comme bien d’autres, ont voté pour la première fois pour l’extrême-droite l’année dernière, séduits par l’accent mis par M. Aliot sur la propreté et la criminalité. Leur maison a été cambriolée deux fois, disent-ils.Bien que satisfait du bilan du maire, M. Talau indique qu’il se ralliera quand même au barrage contre l’extrême-droite pour la prochaine présidentielle et votera Macron en se bouchant le nez. En revanche, Mme Talau envisage désormais de voter pour Marine Le Pen.“Elle a mis de l’eau dans son vin”, estime Mme Talau, ajoutant que M. Macron n’est “pas assez dur”.L’adversaire de M. Aliot en 2014 et 2020, Jean-Marc Pujol, candidate du centre-droit, avait viré davantage vers la droite pour tenter, sans succès, de contrer l’extrême-droite. Il avait gonflé les effectifs de la police, d’après les statistiques gouvernementales, faisant de Perpignan la grande ville de France avec le plus grand nombre de policiers par habitant. Malgré cela, nombre de ses partisans historiques semblent avoir davantage fait confiance à l’extrême droite sur le sujet de la criminalité, et fait défection. De nombreux de castors à gauche se sont plaints d’avoir été ignorés et ont refusé de participer une nouvelle fois à la construction de barrages, dit Agnès Langevine, la candidate des Verts et des Socialistes aux municipales de 2020.“Et ils nous disaient : en 2022, si c’est un Macron-Le Pen, je ne ferai pas plus,” ajoute-t-elle.M. Lebourg, le politologue, estime que M. Aliot a aussi gagné le vote des riches électeurs conservateurs comme les Talaus en adoptant un message économique classique — la même stratégie qu’adopte Mme Le Pen.. Depuis qu’elle a pris les rênes du parti il y a dix ans, Mme Le Pen travaille dur pour “dédiaboliser” le parti.Un monument aux morts à Perpignan, une ville historiquement à droite, en proie à des difficultés économiques, et sensible à la rhétorique du Ralliement National. Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesEn 2015, elle a expulsé son propre père, Jean-Marie Le Pen, qui avait fondé le parti et a longtemps minimisé l’Holocauste.Tout en popularisant des expressions comme “l’ensauvagement”, elle a consciemment évité tout langage explosif évoquant un supposé “grand remplacement” de la population française blanche par les immigrants africains et musulmans. En 2018, elle a rebaptisé le Front National du nom plus inclusif de “Rassemblement”.Le parti veut cependant durcir les politiques migratoires pour les étudiants étrangers et diviser le solde migratoire par vingt.Il veut aussi interdire le port du voile musulman en public et limiter la “présence d’éléments ostentatoires” à l’extérieur des lieux de culte s’ils ne s’accordent pas avec l’environnement, dans une référence apparente aux minarets.À Perpignan, M. Aliot s’est concentré sur la criminalité, dépensant 8 millions d’euros pour l’embauche de 30 nouveaux policiers, l’ouverture de nouveaux commissariats et la mise en place de patrouilles à vélo et nocturnes, en réponse à une augmentation du trafic de drogues.Jeanne Mercier, une électrice de gauche âgée de 24 ans, dit que beaucoup gens autour d’elle ont été “séduits” par le maire d’extrême-droite.Camille Rosa, à gauche, vote à gauche, mais ne sait pas si elle fera de nouveau barrage contre Marine Le Pen lors des élections présidentielles de 2022.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York Times“On est le test pour montrer à la France que le FN fonctionne et les gens adhèrent et sont contents”, dit-t-elle, utilisant l’ancien nom du parti. “Finalement c’est pas tant le diable que ça.”Camille Rosa, 35 ans, ne sait pas si elle fera à nouveau barrage contre Mme Le Pen l’année prochaine. Les attaques des ministres du président contre “l’islamo-gauchisme” et les universitaires spécialistes du féminisme, du genre ou des questions raciales ont changé son regard sur le gouvernement de M Macron.“J’ai l’impression que leurs ennemis, ce n’est plus du tout l’extrême-droite”, dit-elle, “mais c’est nous, les personnes de gauche”.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    What Happened When Germany’s Far-Right Party Railed Against Lockdowns

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyWhat Happened When Germany’s Far-Right Party Railed Against LockdownsIt didn’t work.Ms. Sauerbrey is a contributing opinion writer who focuses on German politics, society and culture.March 12, 2021A protester against lockdown measures in Berlin last year. Alternative for Germany has sought to improve its electoral standing by embracing anti-lockdown radicalism.Credit…John Macdougall/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesBERLIN — In November, as Covid-19 cases began to rise, thousands of people gathered in Berlin to protest against restrictions. In among the conspiracy theorists and extremists were several lawmakers from the country’s main opposition party, the far-right, anti-immigration Alternative for Germany.It was striking to see legislators mingle with conspiracists in the streets before heading to the parliament for a debate. Yet it wasn’t too surprising. The party, known as AfD, has sought to improve its electoral standing ahead of the national election in September by associating with the anti-lockdown movement, an amorphous mix of conspiracy theorists, shady organizations and outraged citizens.But it hasn’t worked. In the months since the pandemic, the AfD’s support has slipped. Already struggling to reach new voters, its embrace of anti-lockdown sentiment seems to have further limited its appeal — and sped up its transformation into an extremist organization.When the pandemic reached Germany in March, the AfD’s initial response was cautious. Prominent party legislators warned about the virus, encouraged the government to act swiftly and voted for a package of economic relief. “Closing ranks is our first duty as citizens now,” Alexander Gauland, a co-leader of the party, said.But this attempt to cater to the average voter came at a cost. The party soon found itself deprived of many of its usual supporters, who took a different course, downplaying the danger and castigating the government. On Facebook and social media, the party stuttered. “The AfD,” said Johannes Hillje, a political consultant who analyzed the party’s social media performance during the pandemic, “lost its rage machine.”For a party fueled by indignation, that was a problem. As the first lockdown was tentatively lifted, through April and May, many leading AfD figures performed a 180-degree turn. No longer consensual, they fiercely railed against restrictions of any kind, which they claimed were unconstitutional as well as economically ruinous.In November, to demonstrate its defiance, the party held an in-person convention with hundreds of participants packed into a hall. That same month, an AfD legislator appeared in the parliament, where masks are mandatory, wearing one riddled with holes. And prominent party members not only attended some of the anti-lockdown protests that spread across the country last year but also adopted the protesters’ talking points, for example by calling Germany a “Corona dictatorship.” The AfD became something like the anti-lockdown party.The move made sense. By the time the pandemic arrived, the party “had started to struggle,” Kai Arzheimer, a professor of political science at the University of Mainz, told me. Migration had vanished from the top of voters’ concerns, depriving the party of its momentum. It was unclear how it might make further inroads.What’s more, the party was increasingly seen as extreme and radical. The media uncovered many ties to extremist groups such as the Identitarian Movement, which advocates ethnically homogeneous societies, while a radical internal group gained power. The AfD was considered so dangerous that the domestic intelligence service even put one wing of it under surveillance. “This has harmed the party’s potential to mobilize moderate voters,” Mr. Arzheimer said.Unable to appeal to more moderate voters, and in the midst of a pandemic that shored up support for the major parties, the party entwined itself with anti-lockdown radicalism. By conventional measures, the move has failed. National polls routinely place the party at or under 10 percent approval; two regional elections this Sunday are expected to underline the party’s electoral difficulties. The historic showing of 2017 — when the AfD became the first far-right party to enter Germany’s postwar parliament — is unlikely to be repeated, let alone surpassed.That doesn’t make the party less of a danger, though. In ways reminiscent of former President Donald Trump, the AfD is seeking to scuttle public trust in the political system. An AfD legislator suggested from the floor of the parliament that mail-in ballots were one of many “dark ideas” with which the other parties hoped to rig the vote, while a section of the party has run ads on Facebook warning against the practice.Ahead of an election where many may vote remotely — Germany’s vaccination program probably won’t be complete by fall — this amounts to a calculated strategy of subversion. Though the party’s influence is limited, the fact that 8 percent to 10 percent of the electorate seems unshakable in its support is deeply concerning.In a landmark decision last week, the country’s domestic intelligence agency put the entire AfD under surveillance, branding it an extremist organization. Whether it’s right to do so — and whether the order, which was suspended and is under legal challenge, will be enacted — is hard to know. But the AfD, and the danger it potentially poses to Germany’s democracy, is not going anywhere.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More