Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 213 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      De la gloria a la oscuridad: la vida de Aung San Suu Kyi, lideresa política de Birmania

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Coup in MyanmarWhat We KnowA Deadly GameMilitary’s AuthorityAung San Suu Kyi Is DetainedWho Is Aung San Suu Kyi?AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyDe la gloria a la oscuridad: la vida de Aung San Suu Kyi, lideresa política de BirmaniaDiez años después de que dejó el arresto domiciliario y prometió luchar por la justicia, la lideresa civil de Birmania se ha convertido en la carcelera de sus críticos y una apologista de la matanza de las minorías.Partidarios de la Liga Nacional para la Democracia desfilaban con un retrato de Aung San Suu Kyi en Rangún, Birmania, durante la jornada electoral del domingo.Credit…Sai Aung Main/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images3 de febrero de 2021Actualizado 08:03 ETRead in EnglishHace una década, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi fue liberada luego de pasar varios años de arresto domiciliario —sin haber podido usar un celular o Facebook— y cuando celebró el fallo de la corte en la oficina de su partido político, que estaba prohibido, emanaba un fuerte olor de humedad por los informes de derechos humanos que estaban amontonados en el piso.Armada con una colección de premios internacionales, lucía un tocado de flores frescas en el cabello cuando se sentó con una postura impecable y le prometió al mundo dos cosas: que lucharía para que los presos políticos de Birmania fuesen liberados y pondría fin a la lucha étnica que ha mantenido las fronteras del país en guerra durante siete décadas.Pero ambas promesas no fueron cumplidas y el icono más resplandeciente de la democracia perdió su brillo. Aung San Suu Kyi, de 75 años, se ha convertido en una apologista de los mismos generales que la encerraron, minimizando su campaña asesina contra la minoría musulmana rohinyá. Como pertenece a la mayoría étnica bamar, sus críticos más fuertes la acusan de racismo y falta de voluntad para luchar por los derechos humanos de todas las personas en Birmania. More

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Discrimina y vencerás… en las elecciones peruanas

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpiniónSupported byContinue reading the main storyComentarioDiscrimina y vencerás… en las elecciones peruanasPerú celebrará elecciones presidenciales en medio de inestabilidad política y una crisis de salud por la pandemia. En un país confinado y donde solo el 40 por ciento de la población tiene acceso a internet, las campañas virtuales son una posibilidad y un dilema.La bandera del Perú durante una marcha posterior a la toma de posesión del presidente interino Francisco Sagasti.Credit…Sebastian Castaneda/ReutersEs periodista y escritora peruana.2 de febrero de 2021 a las 12:13 ETAl menos un par de candidatos a la presidencia del Perú y otros tantos expertos han sugerido que la campaña electoral del Perú se traslade al mundo virtual y las redes sociales.Keiko Fujimori y Julio Guzmán (él contagiado recientemente con la COVID-19), dos de los aspirantes que tienen mayor intención de voto —junto con George Forsyth, Verónika Mendoza y Yonhy Lescano—, han hablado de hacer una campaña al menos parcialmente digital por el incremento de los contagios de la segunda ola de la pandemia.Parece un argumento sensato. Perú es el país con más muertos por la COVID-19 por millón de habitantes en Sudamérica. En Lima y Callao, por ejemplo, ya no hay disponible una sola cama en la unidad de cuidados intensivos. En ese delicado contexto la propuesta de los presidenciables podría interpretarse como un gesto de responsabilidad social si no fuera porque aproximadamente el 60 por ciento de la población en el país no tiene acceso a internet en casa.El presidente, Francisco Sagasti, anunció de manera reciente la cuarentena total en la mayoría de ciudades del país al menos para los próximos días, en los que los candidatos no podrán movilizarse por el territorio, salvo las pocas zonas que no están bajo alarma extrema. Y no es seguro que puedan volver a recorrerlo con sus propuestas, lo que de facto nos pondría en la perspectiva de una campaña en gran parte virtual. Es algo que podría favorecer a los candidatos con reconocimiento de nombre y recursos pero a costa de que relegará, inevitablemente, a una enorme porción de la sociedad del juego democrático.La pandemia no solo ha dejado en evidencia que en el Perú no existe un sistema de salud capaz de hacer frente a esta crisis, también ha revelado las enormes falencias de su sistema político. A solo tres meses de las elecciones este sistema no puede garantizar que la mayoría de las personas pueda ejercer un voto informado debido a la abismal brecha digital. A la discriminación económica, sanitaria y laboral, se suma la que limita la participación democrática.La nuestra es una sociedad aún escindida y discriminadora en la que la privatización de los servicios públicos expone a miles a la enfermedad. Venden el oxígeno, suben el precio del paracetamol y es posible que hasta quieran vender la vacuna. En el Perú mueren los más pobres pero no por coronavirus, sino por falta de camas. Y es esa la misma población que tiene poco o ningún acceso a internet.Familiares de un hombre que falleció por la COVID-19 llevan su ataúd en un cementero limeño el 27 de enero de este año.Credit…ReutersSiempre hemos sabido que la peruana es una democracia endeble, casi un espejismo, pero al menos se ficcionaban las decisiones colectivas y parecían respetarse los mecanismos de participación. Pero la crisis pandémica quizás le ha dado una excusa a quienes han dominado la política peruana para encontrar maneras de limitar todavía más el voto. Solo una opinión vertida desde el privilegio puede demostrar tanta ignorancia acerca de nuestras realidades.El discurso concienzudo a favor de la virtualidad de las elecciones solo se lo pueden permitir candidatos que, como Keiko Fujimori, cuentan ya con una red de apoyo de medios de comunicación, leales a su proyecto político desde la década en que gobernaba su padre, o que tienen gran influencia y una buena base de seguidores.La propia Keiko, quien ha disputado ya dos veces las elecciones a la presidencia, se encuentra ahora mismo en régimen de arresto domiciliario con varias investigaciones abiertas por corrupción pero ha prometido un gobierno de “mano dura” contra el coronavirus y la crisis política, en la que lleva meses sumido el Perú precisamente por las maniobras en el Congreso de su partido y sus aliados.Una campaña exclusivamente virtual se la pueden permitir también los candidatos como Guzmán y Forsyth, cercanos al poder y a los círculos empresariales que podrían contar con grandes recursos para invertir en las pautas de internet y redes, además de contar con respaldo mediático.En esas condiciones, quizás la única candidata de izquierda que parte con posibilidades, Verónika Mendoza, de Juntos por el Perú, no solo está en desventaja, sino que sus oportunidades de competir se reducen. Sin un nombre tan reconocible como Fujimori (cuya familia ha dominado la política peruana durante buena parte de los últimos treinta años) o sin el respaldo de las élites empresariales (como Forsyth y Guzmán), su campaña necesita de la calle y del arrastre popular. Por ahora Mendoza no ha hecho grandes eventos de campaña pero sí se está moviendo respetando los protocolos de seguridad. Aún así algunas encuestas la colocan ya en segundo lugar.Perú no es Francia o Estados Unidos, donde también se llevaron a cabo elecciones municipales y presidenciales en plena pandemia, y donde ha funcionado el voto en ausencia y otros protocolos pandémicos. En el Perú eso es imposible. Para emitir su voto, que sigue siendo obligatorio, mucha gente suele desplazarse largas horas desde sus comunidades hasta los centros de votación. Si la campaña pasa a ser solo virtual, ese alto porcentaje de personas no podrá ser parte del proceso previo de los comicios, ni tomar contacto y escuchar las alternativas sobre la mesa para forjarse una opinión. Y eso se llama exclusión.Hace unos días algunos hablaban de postergar las elecciones. Pero pese al nuevo confinamiento y toques de queda recién decretados —que poca gente puede acatar, pues el 70 por ciento de los trabajadores peruanos son informales—, la idea de postergar las elecciones por unos meses no solo no resolvería la brecha digital. También daría más margen a la polarización que se vive todos los días en las calles entre bandos políticos, entre negacionistas de la pandemia, activistas por la reactivación económica a toda costa y defensores de la cuarentena y los protocolos sanitarios.Es necesario emprender un proceso electoral limpio y sin más demora para poner en marcha una nueva etapa tras un año políticamente convulso. Ese debe ser el inicio para que el país entre en la senda de la reconstrucción en el año en que se proyecta celebrar el bicentenario de su independencia. En cuanto se reabra progresivamente la circulación en algunas semanas, las autoridades deberían seguir permitiendo a los partidos difundir su mensaje en igualdad de condiciones y estos esforzarse por hacer un trabajo pedagógico y cívico de cuidados mientras se garantiza la democracia participativa.Eso sí, no olvidemos a la hora de votar que esta disyuntiva sobre la campaña digital ha revelado también algo que es tan obvio como estremecedor: lo alejados que pueden estar de la vida de la gente muchos de los que quieren ser presidentes del Perú. Tal parece que siguen su propia máxima: discrimina y vencerás.Gabriela Wiener es escritora, periodista y colaboradora regular de The New York Times. Es autora de los libros Sexografías, Nueve lunas, Llamada perdida y Dicen de mí.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      In Myanmar Coup, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi Ends as Neither Democracy Hero nor Military Foil

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Coup in MyanmarDaw Aung San Suu Kyi Is DetainedWhat We KnowPhotosWho Is Aung San Suu Kyi?AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyDemocracy Hero? Military Foil? Myanmar’s Leader Ends Up as NeitherThe army’s detention of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi brought an abrupt end to the theory that she might strike a workable balance between civilian and military power.A demonstration outside Myanmar’s embassy in Bangkok on Monday against the detainment of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.Credit…Adam Dean for The New York TimesFeb. 1, 2021Updated 7:20 p.m. ETIn the years Myanmar was cowed by a military junta, people would tuck away secret photos of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, talismans of the heroine of democracy who would save her country from a fearsome army even though she was under house arrest.But after she and her party won historic elections in 2015 and again last year by a landslide — cementing civilian government and her own popularity within Myanmar — Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi came to be viewed by the outside world as something altogether different: a fallen patron saint who had made a Faustian pact with the generals and no longer deserved her Nobel Peace Prize.In the end, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, 75, could not protect her people, nor could she placate the generals. On Monday, the military, which had ruled the country for nearly five decades, seized power again in a coup, cutting short the governance of her National League for Democracy after just five years.Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi was detained in a pre-dawn raid, along with her top ministers and a slew of pro-democracy figures. The rounding up of critics of the military continued into Monday night, and the nation’s telecommunications networks suffered constant interruptions.Across the country, government billboards still carried her image and that of her party’s fighting peacock. But the army, under commander in chief Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, was back in charge.The disappearance of Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, who represented two entirely different archetypes to two different audiences, domestic and foreign, proved her inability to do what so many expected: form a political equipoise with the military with whom she shared power.Hundreds of police officers were deployed across Yangon, the country’s largest city and commercial capital.Credit…The New York TimesBy allowing negotiations with General Min Aung Hlaing to wither, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi had lost the military’s ear. And by defending the generals in their ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims, she lost the trust of an international community that had championed her for decades.“Aung San Suu Kyi rebuffed international critics by claiming she was not a human-rights activist but rather a politician. But the sad part is she hasn’t been very good at either,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director for Human Rights Watch. “She failed a great moral test by covering up the military’s atrocities against the Rohingya. But the détente with the military never materialized, and her landslide election victory is now undone by a coup.”President Biden, in the first test of his reaction to a coup intended to upend a democratic election, issued a strongly worded statement that seemed designed to differentiate himself from the way his predecessor dealt with human rights issues.“In a democracy, force should never seek to overrule the will of the people or attempt to erase the outcome of a credible election,” he said, using language similar to what he said after the Jan. 6 siege on the U.S. Capitol that sought to overturn his own election. He called on nations to “come together in one voice” to press Myanmar’s military to immediately relinquish power.“The United States is taking note of those who stand with the people of Burma in this difficult hour,” he added, using the former name for Myanmar as it is still used by the U.S. government. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Museveni Faces a More Critical U.S. and E.U. After Ugandan Election

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyThe West’s Patience With Uganda’s Strongman Wanes After a Bloody ElectionThe United States is considering action against the government of President Yoweri Museveni, a longtime ally who has crushed dissent at home. The European Union has also expressed concern.Supporters waiting for the arrival of President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda this week in Kampala, the capital.Credit…Sumy Sadurni/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesJan. 30, 2021, 9:31 a.m. ETNAIROBI, Kenya — A bloody and contentious election season in Uganda, in which dozens of people were killed and the principal opposition candidate was placed under de facto house arrest, recently gave a sixth five-year term to President Yoweri Museveni, a staunch U.S. military ally.But now the U.S. State Department says it is considering a range of actions against Mr. Museveni, who, since taking office in 1986, has been among Africa’s leading beneficiaries of American aid, taking in billions of dollars even as he tightened his iron grip on the nation.Mr. Museveni, 76, has suppressed opposing voices for years, often by force, and the campaign leading to this month’s election was marred by the intimidation of opposition candidates and their staffs, particularly Bobi Wine, a pop-star-turned-lawmaker who rose to become the president’s toughest challenger. Violence convulsed the country during the campaign, and election observers and opposition figures contend that electoral fraud contributed to Mr. Museveni’s re-election.“We have significant concerns about Uganda’s recent elections,” a State Department representative said in a statement emailed to The New York Times. “The United States has made clear that we would consider a range of targeted options, including the imposition of visa restrictions, for Ugandan individuals found to be responsible for election-related violence or undermining the democratic process.”The “conduct of the Ugandan authorities during those elections,” the statement read, “is one factor that will be considered as we make determinations on future U.S. assistance.”Mr. Museveni, right, has suppressed opposing voices for years, often by force.Credit…Luke Dray/Getty ImagesOther nations have also voiced concern over how the postelection period in Uganda has unfolded. A spokesperson for the European Union said the bloc was “gravely concerned by the continued harassment of political actors and parts of civil society” and continued to “remain attentive to the situation on the ground.”Mr. Museveni has reportedly been meeting with foreign diplomats in recent days, as concerns mounted about the conduct of the vote, and many Western and African partners have yet to formally congratulate him. The Kenyan presidency deleted a Facebook post congratulating him after it was widely criticized and Facebook erroneously flagged it as containing “false” information.Before, during and after the vote, journalists and independent observers were kept from closely watching the proceedings, and the government refused accreditation to most of the observers the U.S. mission in Uganda had intended to deploy. A nationwide internet shutdown restricted the flow of information.As the election results trickled in, the authorities surrounded Mr. Wine’s home, refused to let him out and even prevented the U.S. ambassador from paying him a visit. Security officers withdrew from his home this week after a court ruling, but they continue to maintain roadblocks nearby, and they surround his party’s headquarters. Mr. Wine, 38, whose real name is Robert Kyagulanyi, maintains that the election was rigged in Mr. Museveni’s favor and plans to present evidence in court on Monday challenging the results.For decades, Mr. Museveni has received financial and diplomatic support from the United States and other Western nations. And he has promoted his regime as a guarantor of stability not just in Uganda — which was torn by coups and violence before he took the helm — but also in the surrounding regions of East and Central Africa.Yet under him, Uganda has repeatedly sent troops across its borders to take sides in conflicts in neighboring countries. And although Mr. Museveni welcomed many refugees from South Sudan, independent researchers have reported that his government clandestinely supplied weapons used to stoke the war there that cost the lives of nearly 400,000 people.The opposition leader Bobi Wine speaking with reporters this week at his home, where he has been held under house arrest.Credit…Nicholas Bamulanzeki/Associated Press“He’s been the region’s pyromaniac since he came to power, whether we are talking about Sudan, South Sudan or Rwanda or the Democratic Republic of Congo,” said Helen Epstein, the author of “Another Fine Mess: America, Uganda and the War on Terror.” “His army has intervened everywhere, to the detriment of peace.”Every year, the United States alone provides more than $970 million to Uganda, supporting the military, the education and agricultural sectors, and antiretroviral treatment for almost a million H.I.V.-positive Ugandans.Uganda has in turn partnered with the United States in working to quell terrorism, deploying more than 6,200 troops to the African Union mission in Somalia that is battling the Qaeda-linked group al-Shabab. Thousands of Ugandans have served as guards on American bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Uganda has been lauded as one of the best places to be a refugee, with those seeking asylum given land and the ability to work and move around.But as Mr. Museveni continued to curry favor with the West and receive support from financial institutions like the World Bank, his government “has taken advantage of these resources and positive images to undermine the very interests it is lauded for safeguarding and to pursue its own agenda instead,” said Michael Mutyaba, an independent researcher on Ugandan politics.At home, Mr. Museveni has been criticized for clamping down on the opposition, introducing anti-gay legislation and unleashing the security forces on civilians. Waves of scandals have also shown how officials embezzled millions of dollars in government funds, along with reports of development aid being diverted to the military.Police officers at a checkpoint on a street outside Mr. Wine’s home in the days after the election.Credit…Yasuyoshi Chiba/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIn 2005, he engineered the repeal of term limits so that he could remain in power. In 2018, he signed a law that scrapped the presidential age limit of 75.Observers like Ms. Epstein say the violence around the election, and the clampdown on opposition figures like Mr. Wine — including by dragging him out of his vehicle while he talked with reporters on live video — drew global condemnation and might tip things this time round.Before and after the Jan. 14 election, Senators Bob Menendez of New Jersey and Chris Coons of Delaware; Jake Sullivan, President Biden’s national security adviser; a group of donor nations, including Canada and members of the European Union; and United Nations experts all denounced the government’s conduct.“I think finally people are beginning to wake up” to the reality of Mr. Museveni’s Uganda, Ms. Epstein said.If so, that would undermine the standing Mr. Museveni has cultivated as an elder statesman in East Africa, said Angelo Izama, a Ugandan political analyst.“If he continues taking these body blows to his reputation at home,” Mr. Izama said, “I think he’s going to lose his standing not only in the region but also gradually lose the Western powers who are increasingly determined to align and change their tack on how they deal with Uganda.”Supporters of Mr. Museveni celebrating in Kampala this month after he secured a sixth term in office.Credit…Sumy Sadurni/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesBut Ken O. Opalo, an assistant professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, said that while donor relations with Uganda might change, it remains to be seen whether these changes will be substantial.Western countries, he said, have almost always erred on the side of maintaining their relationships with Mr. Museveni’s government instead of pushing him to bring in much-needed reforms.“Museveni knows this fickleness and has exploited it masterfully over the years,” Mr. Opalo said.And while the “Biden administration will say the right things,” Mr. Opalo said he was “less optimistic about what it will be able to do, and whether such action would necessarily lead to change for the better in Uganda.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Election Reform: Here Are Some Ideas

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storylettersElection Reform: Here Are Some IdeasReaders offer their own suggestions in response to a Sunday Review article.Jan. 29, 2021, 11:16 a.m. ET Credit…Illustration by The New York Times; from left: Eli Durst for The New York Times, Angela Weiss, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images, Drew Angerer via Getty Images and Pool photos by J. Scott Applewhite.To the Editor:Re “Let’s Ensure This Never Happens Again” (Sunday Review, Jan. 10):In the aftermath of the Capitol riot, Beverly Gage and Emily Bazelon offer a broad range of ideas for “fixing what ails” our elections, with one gobsmacking omission: Nowhere do they touch upon the restoration of public, observable vote-counting.It was primarily the lack of transparency of our computerized voting process that gave oxygen to Team Trump’s bad-faith attacks on that process. Defenders of the shield were quick to circle the wagons and declare the 2020 election “the most secure in our history.” But such declarations do not make it so.What would make it so is nothing less than a first count of hand-marked ballots by humans working in multi-partisan teams observable to the public.All the reforms Ms. Gage and Ms. Bazelon put forth would be beneficial. But without the de-computerization now adopted by many of our fellow advanced democracies, every idea they propose will fall short of the goal that election results be trusted and accepted by winners and losers alike so that the trauma of the 2020 election will not be repeated.Jonathan D. SimonFelton, Calif.The writer is the author of “CODE RED: Computerized Elections and the War on American Democracy.”To the Editor:Beverly Gage and Emily Bazelon propose a number of remedies for certain aspects of our electoral system. We believe that an essential additional corrective measure is evaluating the mental health and psychological stability of presidential candidates before the primary voting process.It is highly probable that if three commonly used and reliable psychological assessment evaluations (Rorschach Inkblot Test, Thematic Apperception Test and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2) had been administered to Donald Trump when he was a candidate, his now manifestly evident mental aberrations would have been discovered.Now is a most advantageous time to correct this significant and potentially dangerous omission in the presidential candidate vetting protocol.C. William KaiserDavid E. CreaseyThe writers are retired from Harvard Medical School. Dr. Kaiser was an assistant professor of surgery, and Dr. Creasey was a clinical instructor in psychiatry.To the Editor:There are two additional fixes that need to be added: making money less central to politics, and devising a way to protect the public from the unqualified and incapable from running in the first place.The first requires campaigns to be paid for by government, for political messages to be fact-based and subject to libel/defamation suits, and for Citizens United to be overturned.The second requires that some independent assessment be shared of a candidate’s qualification to run and evidence of a grasp of what the job entails. A nonpartisan credentialing commission could be instituted.Adding these would give candidates more time to address policy and free the public to have greater confidence that whoever gets in office has, at least, a basic understanding of what is required.If we fix the structure, minimize money and protect the public from the charlatan or the incompetent, we might have a chance of ensuring stability.Greg RathjenMilton, Ga.To the Editor:This article put forth some good ideas to improve our voting system. But one crucial change was overlooked: Change Election Day to a Sunday, as in most European countries.How do we expect people to leave work or school or other weekday activities in order to go cast a ballot? Voting on Sunday would turn the day into a holiday, rather than an arduous patriotic task.Joan Z. ShoreParisAdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      La paz fea de El Salvador

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpiniónSupported byContinue reading the main storyComentarioLa paz fea de El SalvadorEn el preludio de las elecciones, el presidente Nayib Bukele llamó farsa a los Acuerdos de Paz, que acabaron con una guerra de 12 años. Sus palabras indignaron, pero sobre todo revelan que busca presentarse como el parteaguas en la historia del país.Nayib Bukele, el presidente de El Salvador, en diciembreCredit…Miguel Lemus/EPA vía ShutterstockEs periodista y editor de El Salvador.26 de enero de 2021 a las 05:00 ETSAN SALVADOR — El Salvador firmó sus Acuerdos de Paz hace 29 años y desde entonces no ha vivido en paz. Ha vivido sin guerra civil, lo que no ha sido poco ni suficiente. Eso ha quedado claro estos días.El aniversario de aquel pacto que acabó con 12 años de conflicto armado ocurrió hace un par de semanas y tuvo que haber pasado sin pena ni gloria, pero el presidente Nayib Bukele lo convirtió en todo un evento que terminó con su propia etiqueta en redes sociales. Lo que Bukele hizo suena pueril de solo pronunciarse: utilizó nuestra guerra y nuestra paz como arma arrojadiza contra sus opositores políticos. “¡La guerra fue una farsa! Fue una farsa como los Acuerdos de Paz. ‘Ay, está mancillando los Acuerdos de Paz’. Sí, los mancillo, porque fueron una farsa, una negociación entre dos cúpulas o ¿qué beneficios le trajo al pueblo salvadoreño?”, dijo Bukele a mediados de diciembre durante un discurso público.Las palabras de Bukele escandalizaron a muchos, pero también el escenario donde las pronunció. Lo hizo durante un discurso en el caserío El Mozote, donde en 1981, con la guerra recién iniciada, un batallón militar masacró a cerca de 1000 personas desarmadas.En la tarima, observando al presidente aquel día, estaba Sofía Romero, una mujer que sobrevivió luego de huir tras ser violada por cinco militares en los meses previos a la masacre. De las cuatro personas que estaban en la tarima, Sofía fue la única que no tuvo turno de palabra. La sobreviviente fue solo espectadora de aquel evento.Bukele se vende como un mesías, como el parteaguas en la historia de este país y no pretende permitir que le compita ninguna guerra, con todos sus magnicidios y masacres; ni tampoco una paz, con todos sus logros e imperfecciones.El estilo autoritario, 29 años después de salir de una batalla contra regímenes militares, sigue gustando en El Salvador. La acumulación del poder es el camino, según la gran mayoría. Somos los herederos de una paz fea. Importante, necesaria, pero fea.Durante décadas en el poder, los partidos que gobernaron la posguerra, la exguerrilla del FMLN y el derechista ARENA, llevaron al país a otras guerras nuevas, donde sus errores en el manejo de la seguridad pública terminaron convirtiéndonos en la nación más homicida del mundo en años recientes. Los hombres a los que esos partidos eligieron para gobernar nuestra paz saquearon este país a manos llenas. Tres expresidentes han pasado de diferentes formas por procesos relacionados con su corrupción: dos de la derecha, uno de la izquierda. Afearon nuestra paz durante años.Ahora Bukele no pretende deformarla más, sino sacarla de la discusión llamándole farsa.El repudio a las palabras de Bukele sobrevivió a las fiestas navideñas y perduró hasta la conmemoración del 29 aniversario de la Paz este 16 de enero. Un centenar de académicos publicó una carta abierta exigiendo al presidente honrar la memoria de una guerra que dejó más de 75.000 muertos. Geoff Thale, presidente de la Oficina en Washington para Asuntos Latinoamericanos (WOLA), un influyente laboratorio de ideas en aquella capital del poder político, publicó un análisis diciendo que las declaraciones de Bukele eran tristes, pero no sorprendentes.Estoy de acuerdo: las palabras del presidente fueron ofensivas, violentas incluso, ignorantes, pero también conscientes y previsibles. Reflejan la visión política de Bukele, en la que su autoritarismo y megalomanía son principios rectores y alcanzan nuevas cimas en el transcurso de su mandato. Esta vez, Bukele dejó clara su intención: la memoria de la guerra y de los Acuerdos de Paz no le sirven para sus aspiraciones políticas. Recordar un conflicto y su resolución no funciona porque él no fue el protagonista. Era apenas un niño cuando aquello terminó en 1992.Pero el intento de anular a los demás sí le ha funcionado en su carrera política y es su declarada intención para las elecciones legislativas y municipales de febrero: ganó la presidencia asegurando que acabaría con “los mismos de siempre”, a pesar de que él proviene de años de función pública como miembro del izquierdista FMLN y algunos de sus candidatos y aliados más visibles sean políticos curtidos en los partidos de la derecha salvadoreña. Ahora, en estos comicios que son una meta para él, el eslogan de campaña reza que todos esos que no están con él “van para afuera”. Para Bukele, todos los políticos que lo precedieron y ahora no lo aplauden son un lastre, y su estrategia pasa por anularlos en las urnas y en la memoria de los salvadoreños.Las redes sociales fueron protagonistas de esta conmemoración. Un hashtag en el centro de todo: #ProhibidoOlvidarSV. Decenas de miles de salvadoreños compartimos microhistorias de la guerra desde esa etiqueta, hablamos de nuestras muertes y memorias. Fue inspirador que miles de adultos jóvenes, la generación de los hijos de la guerra, asumieran como una afrenta personal las declaraciones de Bukele y se consideraran, aunque sea a través de un acto simbólico, guardianes de esa memoria. Fue un performance potente que atrajo mucha atención.Sin embargo, estos días dejaron también un recordatorio ineludible: las flaquezas de nuestra paz siguen ahí. El meteórico ascenso de Bukele es un claro reflejo de ello.Por más tuits, retuits y me gusta que hayan logrado las microhistorias de la guerra, ese presidente que despreció su legado es el hombre fuerte de la política en El Salvador. Su nota, a más de aún año de gestión y aún en la encuesta donde sale menos favorecido, sigue arriba del 70 por ciento y está camino a unas elecciones legislativas donde todo apunta a que los salvadoreños le darán más poder que a ningún líder de la postguerra. Pronto, Bukele contará con cientos de alcaldes y decenas de diputados sumisos a él.La paz fue el fin de un conflicto, pero también el inicio de una nueva vida en la que, por ejemplo, ya nadie te tortura por leer un libro de Marx. La paz trajo beneficios y obligaciones, pero muchos políticos de antes y de hoy se han olvidado poco a poco de esto último. La paz es su huérfana.Es claro que la ciudadanía debe ser la defensora del legado de los Acuerdos de Paz, porque será la que más sufra su detrimento. Es evidente que la vocación democrática de esta ciudadanía no es su principal rasgo. Pero también es cierto que aún es posible cambiar eso, y que ello pasa por despreciar el desprecio de políticos como Bukele y honrar nuestros Acuerdos de Paz como lo que fueron: la promesa de un futuro que no hemos alcanzado y nunca un arma electoral. Y nunca, pregunten a los torturados y los huérfanos, una farsa.Óscar Martínez es jefe de redacción de El Faro, autor de Los migrantes que no importan y Una historia de violencia y coautor de El Niño de Hollywood, sobre la MS-13.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Giuseppe Conte to Resign as Italian Prime Minister

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Coronavirus OutbreakliveLatest UpdatesMaps and CasesVaccine InformationTimelineWuhan, One Year LaterAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyItaly’s Prime Minister to Quit, Adding Political Chaos to PandemicPrime Minister Giuseppe Conte’s government is likely to collapse, leaving Italy in an uncertain political situation with Covid-19 infections still very high.Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte of Italy, center, addressing the Senate in Rome on Tuesday.Credit…Alessandro Di Meo/EPA, via ShutterstockJason Horowitz, Gaia Pianigiani and Jan. 25, 2021Updated 5:15 p.m. ETPrime Minister Giuseppe Conte of Italy will offer his resignation on Tuesday, his office said on Monday evening, likely leading to the collapse of Italy’s teetering government and plunging the country deeper into political chaos as it faces a still serious coronavirus epidemic and a halting vaccine rollout.Mr. Conte’s resignation will put Italy back in the familiar situation of government instability, but in extraordinary times, with tens of millions of Italians struggling to stay healthy and get by under pandemic restrictions and a deep, global recession. The coronavirus has killed more than 85,000 Italians, one of the world’s highest death tolls. The government, which was making slow but steady progress in vaccinating public health workers, has hit a speed bump and threatened to sue Pfizer for a shortfall in vaccine doses.What will happen after Mr. Conte offers his resignation to President Sergio Mattarella remains unclear. Mr. Conte could remain in charge, heading a new governing coalition with a different lineup of parties, but the possibilities also include a more thorough reorganization under a different prime minister, or even elections to choose a new Parliament.Mr. Conte, who is serving his second consecutive stint as Prime Minister — first as the head of an alliance of right-wing nationalists and populists, and then as the leader of a coalition of populists and the center-left establishment — desperately wants to stay in power.But last week, Matteo Renzi, a wily former prime minister and critic of Mr. Conte, unexpectedly pulled his small center-left party out of the government, depriving it of majority support in the Senate. Mr. Conte, who leads a coalition of the populist Five Star Movement and the center-left Democratic Party, has been unable to attract enough new support in Parliament to replace the votes Mr. Renzi took away.Mr. Renzi said he withdrew from the coalition to protest Mr. Conte’s management of the epidemic, his lack of vision in deciding where to allocate hundreds of billions of euros in recovery funds that Italy is set to receive from the European Union, and his undemocratic methods in icing out Parliament by relying on unelected task forces.A food distribution site in Milan earlier this month. The pandemic has devastated Italy’s economy.Credit…Alessandro Grassani for The New York TimesBut many here instead saw Mr. Renzi as performing a complicated political maneuver designed to take revenge on his enemies and gain more influence in the government, perhaps even in a third consecutive government led by Mr. Conte.Mr. Mattarella, the Italian president, is imbued with extraordinary powers during a government crisis and has several options for resolving the crisis.He could, in theory, ask the current coalition to continue, but it is seen as all but certain that he will accept that the government has collapsed. He could task Mr. Conte with forming a new government, which would essentially require the support, and appeasement, of Mr. Renzi’s party, with or without him. That would lead to what was in essence a glorified cabinet reshuffle.On Monday night, a third Conte government seemed, at least publicly, to be the governing coalition’s first choice.Nicola Zingaretti, the leader of the Democratic Party, which Mr. Renzi once led, said in a Twitter post Monday evening that he was “with Conte for a new government.” The Coronavirus Outbreak More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Portugal’s President Wins Re-election, but Far Right Gains

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyPortugal’s President Wins Re-election, but Far Right GainsPortugal once stood out in Europe for having no real far-right presence in politics. Those days appear over.President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, right, after casting his ballot on Sunday.Credit…Miguel Riopa/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesJan. 24, 2021, 8:33 p.m. ETPortugal’s president was re-elected on Sunday to a second term in office, but the vote also confirmed the rise of a far-right politician who formed his party less than two years ago.Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, Portugal’s center-right president, secured a new, five-year term after winning about 61 percent of the vote.The election on Sunday took place in extraordinary circumstances, coming less than two weeks after the Portuguese government put the country back under lockdown orders as a new wave of the coronavirus threatened to overwhelm hospitals.The Socialist candidate, Ana Gomes, won about 13 percent of the vote, just ahead of André Ventura, a far-right candidate who got almost 12 percent of the vote, the results showed.Mr. Ventura’s performance made clear that the far-right, ultranationalist leader has emerged as a force in Portugal. His anti-migration campaign and other demands in large part mirror those of more longstanding far-right politicians like Marine Le Pen of France.Mr. Ventura, 38, a lawyer by training who first gained fame as a soccer commentator, was the first lawmaker to win a seat in Parliament for his newly formed party, Chega!, which means “enough.” Until that victory, in 2019, Portugal had long stood out in Europe for not having a far-right presence in its legislature.Late on Sunday, Mr. Rebelo de Sousa paid tribute to the victims of the pandemic and thanked voters for re-electing him. He acknowledged that “this now-renewed confidence is anything but a blank check.”Mr. Ventura, celebrating “a historic night,” cast the vote as a breakthrough for his party, which he described as “openly anti-system.”Last year in Portugal, the Commission for Equality and Against Racial Discrimination fined Mr. Ventura for comments that he had posted on social media, particularly against the Roma community. Mr. Ventura campaigned on issues such as imposing stronger prison sentences for sex offenders and reducing the number and salaries of lawmakers, as part of his broader attack on the privileges enjoyed by Portugal’s elite.Mr. Rebelo de Sousa, 72, appeared a strong favorite to be re-elected as president, a role that is secondary in Portugal to that of the government, which runs the country day to day and is led by Prime Minister António Costa, a Socialist.The president, however, is more than a ceremonial figure, and has a role over foreign policy and national security as commander of the armed forces, as well as the power to dissolve Parliament and veto some legislation.In the days ahead, Mr. Rebelo de Sousa will need to decide whether to approve or block a recent law passed by lawmakers permitting euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide; the Catholic Church opposed it. The president could also seek a review of the law by Portugal’s Constitutional Court.Turnout on Sunday was about 39 percent, according to the preliminary results, a sign that many registered voters stayed home amid concerns about the new wave of the coronavirus. The lockdown requires residents to stay indoors except for special reasons.Last week, the government also decided to shutter schools and universities, in addition to the closure of nonessential stores already in effect.After visiting a hospital last week, Mr. Rebelo de Sousa warned that the surge in infections was creating “big pressure on health care structures that we had not seen in March.” That, he warned, may lead to “a much longer lockdown” than the one-month period initially established by the government.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More