Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Russia Sees a Western Hand Behind Serbian Street Protests

      by

      The accusations made by Russia’s ambassador to Serbia were the latest efforts by Moscow to thwart a diplomatic campaign to lure Serbia out of Russia’s orbit.Fishing in Serbia’s troubled waters after a contested general election, Russia on Monday accused the West of orchestrating anti-government street protests in Belgrade, the Serbian capital, that flared into violence on Sunday evening.Claims of a Western plot by Russia’s ambassador to Serbia, Alexander Botsan-Harchenko, were the latest efforts by Moscow to thwart a so far mostly fruitless diplomatic campaign by the United States and Europe to lure Serbia out of Russia’s orbit and break traditionally strong ties between the two Slavic and Orthodox Christian nations.Previously peaceful street protests in Belgrade over what the opposition says was a rigged general election on Dec. 17 turned ugly on Sunday after protesters tried to storm the capital’s City Council building and were met by volleys of tear gas from riot police officers.The Russian ambassador, in a television interview, said there was “irrefutable evidence” that the “riot” had been incited by the West. This echoed claims by Serbia’s strongman leader, President Aleksandar Vucic, that his government had come under attack from outside forces seeking a “color revolution,” a term coined by Russia to describe popular revolts that it invariably dismisses as Western conspiracies.“This was an attempted violent takeover of the state institutions of the Republic of Serbia,” Mr. Vucic told Pink TV, a pro-government television station, deriding accusations of election irregularities as “lies” ginned up by his political opponents.There is no evidence that Western governments instigated the past week’s street protests against Mr. Vucic and what his opponents believe was a stolen Belgrade election.Protests against the election continued on Monday. A demonstration led by university students attracted only a modest turnout but blocked traffic on a central Belgrade street to government headquarters.Protesters in front of Belgrade’s city council building on Sunday.Oliver Bunic/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA report last Monday by election monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe said that Serbian voters had been given a wide choice of candidates and that “freedom of expression and assembly were generally respected.” But, it said, the governing party had enjoyed a “tilted playing field” because “pressure on voters as well as the decisive involvement of the president and the ruling party’s systemic advantages undermined the election process overall.”Mr. Vucic’s governing Serbian Progressive Party trounced the opposition in this month’s parliamentary vote but fared less well in an election for the Belgrade City Council, eking out a narrow win that the opposition attributed to voters whom they say were illegally bused into the capital from other areas of the country and from neighboring Kosovo and Bosnia.While accepting defeat in the vote for a new Parliament, the opposition vowed to overturn what it sees as a rigged result in the Belgrade municipal election and has staged daily street protests over the past week.Western countries, wary of burning bridges with Mr. Vucic, have been muted in their criticism of the election. The U.S. ambassador to Serbia, Christopher R. Hill, last week called on the country to address “deficiencies” in the electoral system but stressed that “the U.S. government looks forward to continuing our work with the Serbian government” and bringing it “more fully into the family of Western nations.”Serbia applied to join the European Union in 2009, but its application has been stalled for years. There has been growing pressure from the West on Mr. Vucic to pick a side since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February last year.Mr. Vucic condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine but has balked at joining European sanctions on Russia and shown only fitful interest in settling a long-running dispute over the status of Kosovo, formerly Serbian territory that declared itself an independent state in 2008. Kosovo, inhabited largely by ethnic Albanians, severed its ties to Serbia after a 1999 NATO bombing campaign against Belgrade and other cities that left even many pro-European Serbs deeply suspicious of the West’s intentions.President Aleksandar Vucic of Serbia during a public address in Belgrade, on Sunday.Darko Vojinovic/Associated PressBad blood has slowly eased between Serbia and the West, which blamed Kosovo, not Mr. Vucic, for exacerbating tensions after a flare-up of violence in mainly Serb areas of northern Kosovo in September. That stance led to accusations of “appeasement” of Belgrade from European politicians and commentators who see Mr. Vucic as the principal threat to peace in the Balkans.Instead of giving Mr. Vucic more leeway to break with hard-line Serbian nationalist forces closely aligned with Russia as Washington had hoped, the recent election appears to have only pushed him closer to Moscow.After the clashes in Belgrade on Sunday evening, Serbia’s prime minister Ana Brnabic, a close ally of Mr. Vucic, thanked Russian security forces for sharing information pointing to a Western hand in the opposition protests.“It probably won’t be popular with those from the West, but I feel especially tonight that it is important to stand up for Serbia and to thank the Russian security services that had that information and shared it with us,” Ms. Brnabic said. More

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Calls for Congo Vote to Be Annulled Mount Amid Fraud Accusations

      by

      The election in Africa’s second-largest nation, which cost over a billion dollars, is being closely followed across the world.Opposition leaders in the Democratic Republic of Congo have called for the annulment of the results of the recent general election over accusations of fraud, in a dispute that risks plunging the vast and mineral-rich Central African nation into new political turmoil.Five opposition leaders, including the president’s main challenger, published a statement late Saturday accusing the country’s electoral commission of “massive fraud,” including ballot stuffing, delaying opening polling stations and falsely declaring President Felix Tshisekedi the winner in areas where they say he did not win any votes.The five leaders — who include Moïse Katumbi, a business tycoon and the president’s closest rival — also called on the head of the commission to resign for “having planned and orchestrated the worst electoral fraud that our country has ever known.”The results of the elections are being watched closely not only in Africa, but around the world. Congo is Africa’s second-largest nation and home to deep reserves of cobalt, which is vital in making electric cars. And the wrangling over the election’s credibility could fuel unrest in Congo, which is already dealing with an enormous security and humanitarian crisis in its eastern region.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

    • 113 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      An Explosive Trump Ruling, and a Chaotic Congo Election

      by

      The New York Times Audio app is home to journalism and storytelling, and provides news, depth and serendipity. If you haven’t already, download it here — available to Times news subscribers on iOS — and sign up for our weekly newsletter.The Headlines brings you the biggest stories of the day from the Times journalists who are covering them, all in about five minutes.Colorado’s Supreme Court was the first in the nation to rule that former President Donald J. Trump was disqualified on the basis of the 14th Amendment.Doug Mills/The New York TimesOn Today’s Episode:Colorado Ruling Knocks Trump Off Ballot, by Adam LiptakNearly a Quarter of Trump Voters Say He Shouldn’t Be Nominated if Convicted, by Maggie Haberman, Alan Feuer and Ruth IgielnikAfter Years of Wrangling, E.U. Countries Reach Major Deal on Migration, by Matina Stevis-GridneffF.A.A. to Investigate Exhaustion Among Air Traffic Controllers, by Emily Steel and Sydney EmberInside a Chaotic Billion-Dollar Election in a Pivotal African Nation, by Declan WalshNASA Streams Cat Video From Deep, Deep Space, by Sopan DebJessica Metzger and More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      China Increased U.S. Election Influence in 2022, Intelligence Report Says

      by

      Chinese authorities tacitly approved operations in a handful of races, according to the report, which represents the intelligence agencies’ joint analytic assessment.The Chinese government stepped up its efforts to influence American politics in the 2022 election, a new report released on Monday said, and intelligence officials are trying to learn if Beijing is preparing to further intensify those activities in next year’s presidential election.American intelligence agencies did not observe a foreign leader directing an interference campaign against the United States in 2022 in the same way Russia did in 2016. But, the report said, the U.S. government found an array of countries engaged in some kind of influence operations.And Chinese authorities tacitly approved operations to influence a handful of political races in the United States in 2022, according to the report, which represents the intelligence agencies’ joint analytic assessment.The intelligence agencies have already begun gearing up for influence efforts in the 2024 presidential election, which officials predict will be far more intense than those in 2022, with both China and Russia potentially trying to carry out major operations.In an interview this month, Gen. Paul M. Nakasone, the head of U.S. Cyber Command and the director of the National Security Agency, said 50 people at the two organizations he leads were “working together to generate insights” on the next election. One major question, he said, is whether China will intensify its work or change tactics.“What’s the role of China in 2024?” General Nakasone said. “How do they come in? Is it a Russia model? Is it a model that they executed in 2022? Is it something we haven’t seen before?”The report found that China mostly focused on a few races. While it included few details, U.S. officials have repeatedly highlighted how China worked against a candidate for Congress in New York because of his support for the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests.The Chinese officials trying to influence the vote were operating under longstanding guidance from leaders to work against officials who were perceived to oppose the Chinese government. But the report also said leaders in China had ordered officials to focus their influence operations on Congress, convinced that it “is a locus of anti-China activity.”The Chinese campaigns were designed to portray the United States as chaotic, ineffective and unrepresentative, the report said. But Chinese leaders did not authorize a “comprehensive” effort, wary of the consequences if they were exposed.Nevertheless, the report said, Chinese interference in 2022 was more significant than during the presidential race two years earlier because “they did not expect the current administration to retaliate as severely as they feared in 2020.”The report’s explanation of that conclusion was not declassified and remains redacted in the version released to the public.Since the 2022 vote, China has been experimenting with artificial intelligence to spread disinformation, General Nakasone said.The report also found that Russia sought to denigrate Democrats during the 2022 elections largely because of their support for Ukraine, which Russian forces invaded in February of that year.“Moscow incorporated themes designed to weaken U.S. support for Ukraine into its propaganda,” the report said, “highlighting how election influence operations are a subset of broader influence activity.”Senior intelligence officials have said Russia was not as active in 2022 because senior officials there were distracted with the war in Ukraine. But many intelligence officials believe Russia will probably try to step up its operations in 2024, as aid for Ukraine has become a more divisive political issue.In addition, much of Russia’s ability to influence elections was orchestrated by companies controlled by Yevgeny V. Prigozhin, including the Internet Research Agency. Mr. Prigozhin was killed in a plane crash in August after his failed rebellion and march on Moscow.U.S. officials said they were unsure about how easily Russian officials would be able to interfere in the election without Mr. Prigozhin and with the apparent demise of the Internet Research Agency.The intelligence agencies concluded that foreign governments have largely given up on trying to tamper directly with votes or hack into election infrastructure. Instead, they believe that influence campaigns are more effective. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The Overlooked Crisis in Congo: ‘We Live in War’

      by

      Artillery boomed, shaking the ground, as a couple scurried through the streets of Saké, their possessions balanced on their heads, in the embattled east of the Democratic Republic of Congo.At a crossroads, they passed a giant poster of Congo’s president, Felix Tshisekedi, who is standing for re-election on Dec. 20. “Unity, Security, Prosperity,” read the slogan. They hurried along.“Our children were born in war. We live in war,” Jean Bahati, his face beaded with sweat, said as he paused for breath. It was the fifth time that he and his wife had been forced to flee, he said. “We’re so sick of it.”They joined 6.5 million people displaced by war in eastern Congo, where a conflict that has dragged on for nearly three decades, stoking a vast humanitarian crisis that by some estimates has claiming over six million lives, is now lurching into a volatile new phase.Making sense of the mayhem is not easy. Over 100 armed groups and several national armies are vying for supremacy across a region of lakes, mountains and rainforests slightly bigger than Florida. Meddlesome foreign powers covet its vast reserves of gold, oil and coltan, a mineral used to make cellphones and electric vehicles. Corruption is endemic. Massacres and rape are common.For all that, aid groups struggle to draw attention to the suffering in a country of about 100 million people, even when the numbers affected dwarf those of other crises.“There’s a sense of fatalism about Congo,” said Cynthia Jones, the World Food Program head in eastern Congo. “People seem to think ‘that’s just the way it is’.”However this latest phase of the war, which began in earnest two years ago, is drawn in unusually clear lines.On one side is the M23, a well-organized but ruthless rebel group that the United States and the United Nations say is backed by Rwanda, Congo’s eastern neighbor, which is one-hundredth the size of Congo. (Rwanda denies any link.) Since October, the M23 has seized the main roads into Goma, the regional capital, as well as the hilltops overlooking Saké, 10 miles to the west.People fleeing fighting this month pass an election poster for Congo’s president, Felix Tshisekedi, in Saké. Parts of eastern Congo are so unstable that voting has been canceled there.An aerial view of the regional capital of Goma. Since October, the militia group known as M23 has seized the main roads into Goma.On the other side is Congo’s army, whose troops are notoriously ill-disciplined — even as fighting raged near Saké last week, drunken soldiers careened through its streets. But their strength is boosted by two new allies.One is the Wazalendo, Swahili for patriots, a coalition of once-rival militias that the government cobbled together to repel M23, despite the fighters’ reputation for factionalism and brutality.The second is a force of about 1,000 Romanian mercenaries, many formerly with the French Foreign Legion, deployed around Goma and Saké. If M23 tries to seize the city — as it briefly did once, in 2012 — the Romanians are charged with defending it. “They are the last line of defense,” Romuald, a retired French officer advising the Congolese military, said at a lakeside restaurant in Goma. He asked to omit his surname to protect his security.Amid all that, an election is taking place. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Tracking Retirements in the House: Who Is Leaving Congress?

      by

      Dozens of members of Congress have announced plans to leave their seats in the House of Representatives, setting a rapid pace for congressional departures, with more expected as the 2024 election draws closer. Given Republicans’ razor-thin House majority, the wave of exits has the potential to lead to a significant shake-up next year. Pace of […] More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      A Sweeping Climate Deal, and a U.N. Gaza Cease-Fire Vote

      by

      The New York Times Audio app is home to journalism and storytelling, and provides news, depth and serendipity. If you haven’t already, download it here — available to Times news subscribers on iOS — and sign up for our weekly newsletter.The Headlines brings you the biggest stories of the day from the Times journalists who are covering them, all in about five minutes.Nearly 200 countries convened by the United Nations approved a plan to ramp up renewable energy and rapidly transition away from coal, oil and gas.Fadel Dawod/Getty ImagesOn Today’s Episode:In a First, Nations at Climate Summit Agree to Move Away From Fossil Fuels, by Brad PlumerU.N. General Assembly Votes for Israel-Hamas Cease-Fire, Countering U.S. Veto, by Farnaz FassihiCheating Fears Over Chatbots Were Overblown, New Research Suggests, by Natasha Singer‘Apollo 13’ and ‘The Nightmare Before Christmas’ Join National Film Registry, by Sarah BahrJessica Metzger and More

    • 63 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      ‘Couples Therapy,’ but for Politics

      by

      Growing political polarization is a problem that keeps me up at night. Not because I think it’s bad to have strong opinions, but because of what social scientists call affective polarization: polarization beyond political disagreement, when “ordinary Americans increasingly dislike and distrust those from the other party.” At its worst, affective polarization can lead to hate and dehumanization.When my colleague Thomas Edsall wrote about affective polarization earlier this year, he quoted Sean Westwood, an associate professor of government at Dartmouth, who said that part of what’s behind today’s intense partisan divide is that “Politicians, instead of focusing on the large list of issues where there is broad agreement in the American public, endlessly re-litigate social divides like gay rights and abortion to mobilize a base they fear will stay home if they focus on the mundane details of pragmatic governance.”I see this play out when I hear activists suggest that you can’t talk to them about climate change if you don’t agree with their stance on the Israel-Hamas war, or when I see politicians tying approval of military appointments to abortion access. The attitude seems to be: You have to agree with me about everything or you’re my enemy and we can’t work together on anything. It leads to a whole lot of nothing.Because I cover family policy, the lack of movement on areas of “pragmatic governance” where there is “broad agreement” drives me bonkers. A prime example is federal paid leave, which is popular among voters across the spectrum, yet remains in legislative purgatory, and has for decades. Though there’s a bipartisan working group in Congress on the issue, we’re still a long way from any change, leaving us out of step with most wealthy nations and creating a lot of stress and economic hardship for people just trying to make ends meet while also caring for children or sick family members.But there’s a group of people of all ideological backgrounds — social conservatives, progressive activists, budget wonks and lots of people in between — that’s been convening over the past year, and that gives me a bit of hope for family policy’s future. It also offers a road map for people who disagree vehemently on issues to have productive conversations and find points of connection. If nothing else, the group’s participants agree that too many American families are struggling, that families should be more of a political priority and that something needs to be done to help them.The convocation has the somewhat jargony name Convergence Collaborative on Supports for Working Families, and its members let me sit in on one of their guided discussions with the understanding that I would follow the Chatham House Rule — I can report on what was said during the session but not reveal “the identity nor the affiliation” of any speaker.The group consists of around 30 people and it has met monthly since April. It is directed by Abby McCloskey, who runs a research and consulting firm and was a policy adviser for Jeb Bush’s and Rick Perry’s 2016 presidential campaigns and Howard Schultz’s exploratory 2020 presidential run. The collaborative is funded by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. With permission, after the meeting I reached out to some of the individuals involved to see if they’d be comfortable talking in general terms about their experiences in the group.During the initial meetings, the members came up with set of family policy principles they could mostly agree on. The discussion I observed involved them delivering feedback on a draft of a report outlining those principles. At first, I feared this was going to be an absolutely mind-numbing way to spend three hours of my life and that I would have to gently pinch myself to stay awake while listening to a discussion of the budgetary implications of the earned-income tax credit.Instead, the conversation was spicy while still being respectful, and full of fundamental disagreements that did not seem completely papered over simply for the sake of congeniality. McCloskey described it to me more than once as feeling like “couples therapy,” and it did.For example, a few people objected to wording in the report about center-based child care that they felt put a thumb on the scale against stay-at-home parents. Others disagreed with that objection, and there was an impassioned back-and-forth about it. Ultimately, the moderator stepped in, restated everyone’s point of view in a neutral way and advised that everyone needn’t agree on every detail to move forward.I give a lot of credit to that moderator, the aptly named David Fairman, who is a senior mediator at the Consensus Building Institute, for the structure and tone of the discussion. When we spoke on the phone afterward, he explained that C.B.I. is one of “roughly a dozen” similar organizations that help conduct mediation on public issues. His job is to help find common ground among people with different backgrounds and belief systems.There are three main things Fairman does to facilitate these discussions. The first is to build relationships among participants, so that “they discover that there’s more to them than the battle of tweets that they’ve had or the countering publications or testimony and the identities that they carry with their businesses, with their advocacy groups or whoever.” That kind of humanizing is done partly through guided conversations in breakout groups, and some of it is done more organically through events like in-person cocktail hours.The second is by getting people to “listen openly” during discussions, which means calming down their “rebuttal minds, the hamster wheel that is almost always turning as we listen to someone with whom we disagree, coming up with the counterarguments,” Fairman explained. Instead, he urges people to ask “clarifying questions, not rhetorical questions, not debating questions.” And he gave this example: “What do you mean by saying that ‘you really feel strongly that the child tax credit should remain universal’? Is it that the most important thing about it is that it’s for everyone? Or is it that you are worried that the political support for it will not be there if it is not universal, or is it something else? I just want to know.”The third, and I would argue the most difficult component, is trying to get beyond people’s stated positions to their underlying interests, values and principles, to create space “to explore new ways of thinking about the options,” Fairman said. He referred to a disagreement over how generous a child care tax credit or other allowance could be. The group was at an impasse. While they couldn’t agree on the appropriate size of the credit, a new idea emerged: that more flexibility for parents to choose how to spend the credit “over the life cycle of their child would be a win, even if it doesn’t address the question of the absolute amount of funding.”I also interviewed several members of the group about their experiences. My takeaway was that overall, people were happy to be in conversation with one another, to meet basically agreeable people with totally different ways of framing the problems at hand and to think hard about their own biases. “I think the level of candor was surprising,” said Patrick Brown, a fellow at the right-leaning Ethics and Public Policy Center. “I think everybody committed to coming in with a willingness to critique their own side where necessary and to say frankly where their red lines were.”But the process was certainly not a cure-all. Many said that they wished they had even more time to work through the document they were creating. Some felt that some fundamental concerns — particularly with regard to race and immigration — weren’t aired thoroughly enough before moving on to the particulars of policymaking. More than one person expressed frustration that systemic racism was not more explicitly addressed and that barriers to accessing currently available benefits weren’t fully interrogated.While all the participants thought they would have a document at the end of the process that they would be willing to put their names to, some wondered if it would wind up being so watered down that it wouldn’t have “truly moved the needle,” as Lina Guzman, the chief strategy officer at Child Trends, put it, to get more people fired up about these issues.Even if they come up with something that isn’t earth-shattering, every person I spoke to felt that the process was worthwhile because of the relationships they built. “I think that having created the space to do this is valuable in and of itself, even if what we come out with falls short of what some people might have hoped,” said Katharine Stevens, the founder and chief executive of the Center on Child and Family Policy.We don’t know what unexpected alliances and priorities might arise in national politics in the coming years. But because these professionals have spent a lot of hours together talking about their deepest values, giving and getting clarity about their beliefs, they may find unexpected sources of support for specific ideas that aren’t yet mainstream.I came out of observing the discussion mostly wishing that we could all have mediators like Fairman at our holiday tables. We can’t simply wish away the profound disagreements many of us have. But I’ll certainly be trying to ask more clarifying questions of people I don’t agree with. Quieting my rebuttal mind, as a professional opinion haver, will be a rough one, but I’m going to do my best, and I’m going to try to maintain as much good faith as I can muster. We’ll need it in 2024. More