More stories

  • in

    Zimbabwe’s Neighbors Cast Doubt on Elections That Gave Mnangagwa the Win

    The main regional bloc in southern Africa and the African Union declined to rubber stamp the elections and cast doubt on a vote that led to President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s re-election.The presidential election in Zimbabwe last week that kept the governing party in power and was widely criticized as dubious is likely to isolate the country further from the United States and other Western nations. But it has also exposed Zimbabwe to increased scrutiny and pressure from a surprising place: its neighbors in southern Africa.Before President Emmerson Mnangagwa was declared the winner of a second term on Saturday, the Southern African Development Community and the African Union publicly questioned the legitimacy of Zimbabwe’s elections for the first time.While Zimbabwe has chalked up criticism from the West as colonial gripes, condemnation from other leaders on the continent may not be so easily brushed off, analysts say, particularly when it comes from countries that have to absorb the effects of Zimbabwe’s economic and social turmoil.On Sunday, speaking for the first time since his victory, Mr. Mnangagwa dismissed his African critics.“As a sovereign state, we continue to call on all our guests to respect our national institutions, as they conclude their work,” he said. “I think those who feel the race was not run properly should know where to go to complain. I’m so happy that the race was run peacefully, transparently and fairly in broad daylight.”Southern Africa has long prided itself on relative stability and on being generally free of the coups and terrorism that have plagued other parts of the continent. Countries like South Africa and Botswana boast economic muscle, while Zambia and Malawi have celebrated positive strides in democracy through elections in recent years.Zimbabwe, in contrast, has been seen as a drag on the region, analysts say, with an economic and political crisis that stretches back two decades under the rule of Robert Mugabe and that has led to sanctions and isolation by the United States and other Western nations. The West has demanded clean elections along with governing and human rights reforms from Zimbabwean leaders in exchange for helping the country address its economic woes, including $18 billion of debt.Supporters of Mr. Mnangagwa celebrated after he was declared the winner in Harare, Zimbabwe, on Saturday.Tsvangirayi Mukwazhi/Associated PressThe Southern African Development Community, or S.A.D.C., observer mission criticized laws in Zimbabwe that restricted free speech, voter intimidation by the governing ZANU-PF party and mismanagement by the country’s chief electoral body, most notably the long voting delays because many polling stations did not get ballots in time. The mission also denounced the arrest on election night of dozens of members of a local electoral watchdog that has for years independently verified the results announced by the government.While the election was peaceful, some aspects “fell short of the requirements of the Constitution of Zimbabwe” and regional standards, said Nevers Mumba, a former Zambian vice president who led the mission.That statement was a sharp departure from years past, when S.A.D.C. missions essentially rubber-stamped questionable Zimbabwean elections, analysts said. It could be a sign of the changing times.Governing parties in southern Africa generally share tight bonds, forged during their days as liberation movements battling white colonial rule. In the past, regional observers, perhaps influenced by those historic allegiances, may have been prone to give Zimbabwe a pass, experts said.But Zambia’s president, Hakainde Hichilema, who leads the S.A.D.C. body overseeing elections and appointed Mr. Mumba to lead the observer mission, is not from a liberation party, is close to the West and is heralded as a champion of democracy. Those credentials, experts say, may have produced a more objective assessment of the election.Chipo Dendere, a political science professor at Wellesley College in Massachusetts, said she saw a broader shift among regional bodies across the continent that want to promote stability.They are acknowledging that “the impact of colonialism is there, but we also have to look inward and think, ‘What are we doing as African governments to move the continent forward?’” said Ms. Dendere, who has researched Zimbabwe extensively.But political party officials in other parts of southern Africa don’t seem ready to give up on their longtime allies just yet.The ZANU-PF conference hall in Harare, where portraits of former party leaders and freedom fighters are displayed. Nelson Chamisa, who finished second behind Mr. Mnangagwa, rejected the results on Sunday.John Wessels/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesFikile Mbalula, secretary general of the African National Congress, the liberation party that has governed South Africa since 1994, posted glowing tweets on Saturday night applauding Mr. Mnangagwa’s victory — despite the fact that South Africa has the most to lose from Zimbabwe’s challenges.As Zimbabwe has grappled with astronomical inflation, a severe lack of jobs and a repressive government, hundreds of thousands (and potentially millions) of its citizens have fled to neighboring South Africa over the years. The large exodus has fueled deep anti-immigrant sentiment in South Africa, which is dealing with its own social and economic crisis.Nelson Chamisa, who finished second behind Mr. Mnangagwa, with 44 percent of the votes, rejected the results during a news conference on Sunday. Mr. Chamisa, the leader of Citizens Coalition for Change, claimed that the vote tally released by the electoral commission was false and that his party had the vote tally sheets recorded at polling stations that showed he had actually won.Speaking from a heavily guarded private residence in Harare, the capital, after several hotels refused to allow him to use their properties because of security concerns, Mr. Chamisa said he would take action to make sure the right results were known. But he did not specify if that meant going to the courts or protesting in the streets.“It is important that whoever sits on the throne of this country is aligned with legitimacy,” he said.It remains questionable whether S.A.D.C.’s tough assessment of Zimbabwe’s elections will lead to changes in the country.African countries could impose economic or administrative penalties — such as visa restrictions — on Zimbabwe if it fails to introduce reforms to improve its economy and transparency. But experts say that is highly unlikely. African leaders prefer one-on-one talks to work out their issues, but even then, they do not have a track record of holding one another accountable, analysts said.John Eligon More

  • in

    Thailand’s Old Guard Keeps Its Grip After Voters Seek Change

    The country went months without naming a new prime minister, only for Parliament to elect Srettha Thavisin, a candidate who many frustrated voters say represents the establishment.The election was supposed to be about change. Three months ago, Thai voters propelled the progressive Move Forward Party to a surprise victory. “A new day for the people has arrived,” said Pita Limjaroenrat, the party leader, as he paraded through the streets of Bangkok.On Tuesday, Thailand named a new prime minister, but it was not Mr. Pita. A coalition government was formed in Parliament, made up almost entirely of parties linked to the generals who led the last military coup. Move Forward is in the opposition.Now, many Thais are asking why the future they had voted for is looking so much like the past.“If you go around and talk to middle-class Thais at the moment, they’re saying, ‘What the hell did we have this election for, if this is the result that we get?’” said Christopher Baker, a historian of Thailand.Thailand, Mr. Baker said, is giving up a chance to “reverse the fact that it’s been going backward, in almost every sense, for the last 15 years.”Supporters of the Move Forward Party during a protest in Bangkok last month. No political party had ever been so explicit about changing the status quo in Thailand.Sakchai Lalit/Associated PressAs the second-largest economy in Southeast Asia and an ally of the United States, Thailand was once a powerful player in the region. More recently it has suffered from prolonged economic stagnation brought about by nine years of military rule under Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the general who seized power in a coup in 2014. Mr. Prayuth has steered Thailand away from democracy and toward authoritarian rule — he cracked down on pro-democracy protests and oversaw the rewriting of a Constitution that gave the military more power.His term fueled rising public anger and frustration, culminating in mass protests in 2020. For the first time, disaffected young Thais questioned publicly the relevance of the country’s powerful monarchy, a topic previously considered taboo. They asked why Thailand needed a royal defamation law, one of the world’s strictest, that carries a maximum sentence of up to 15 years in prison.Move Forward capitalized on this anti-royalist, anti-military sentiment, which became the bedrock of the party’s progressive platform. It announced more than 300 policy proposals, including shrinking the military budget and breaking up big business. No political party had ever been so explicit about changing the status quo.“No one would have thought that the party whose policy is to reform the monarchy and the military could win” the election, said Aim Sinpeng, a senior lecturer in politics at the University of Sydney, in Australia. “I don’t think you can take that significance away, ever. It’s completely changed Thailand.”A portrait of Thailand’s king, in Bangkok. Young Thais have questioned publicly the relevance of the powerful monarchy, a topic previously considered taboo.Adam Dean for The New York TimesMove Forward’s election victory jolted the political elite, which quickly set the wheels in motion to block the party’s ascent. In the days after the election, the complaints against Mr. Pita piled up. The Constitutional Court suspended him from Parliament, pending a review of a case involving his shares in a now-defunct media company. The military-appointed Senate blocked him from becoming the prime minister during an initial vote. After that, the Constitutional Court said he could not be renominated for the position.When it became clear that the establishment was not going to allow Move Forward to form a government, Pheu Thai, the populist party founded by the former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, stepped in.Pheu Thai had been Move Forward’s partner in the initial coalition. It said it had to part ways with Move Forward and attempt to form its own coalition after it became clear that other conservative parties were not willing to work with Move Forward.Pheu Thai does not share Move Forward’s liberal agenda, though it has promoted itself as a pro-democracy party. Mr. Thaksin had battled the conservative establishment for decades. But as a billionaire businessman, he is essentially a member of the old guard. Since 2001, the political parties he founded have consistently won the most votes in every election — except for this year.For 15 years, Mr. Thaksin had lived in self-imposed exile to avoid a lengthy jail term on corruption and abuse of power charges, with one goal: to return home to Thailand.Democracy demonstrations in Bangkok in 2020.Adam Dean for The New York TimesOn Tuesday, he did that, just hours before Pheu Thai’s candidate, Srettha Thavisin, secured enough votes in Parliament to become the next prime minister.For many in Thailand, Mr. Thaksin’s timing only confirmed their suspicions that a quid pro quo arrangement had been made between Pheu Thai and the conservative establishment to have his prison sentence reduced in exchange for keeping the military and royalists in power.“Srettha was a product of this deal with the Thai establishment,” said Ruchapong Chamjirachaikul, a politics specialist at iLaw, a civil society organization. “The people don’t feel excited about having Srettha as prime minister.”To obtain enough support for Mr. Srettha, Pheu Thai relied on the military’s support, despite vowing repeatedly in the past to remove the generals from politics. Mr. Srettha, a real estate tycoon, says the party had no choice because of “basic math”: to secure the premiership, he needed 374 votes from both houses of Parliament, including the military-appointed Senate.“It’s not deceiving the people, but I have to say it bluntly that we have to accept reality,” Mr. Srettha, 61, said in a speech to Pheu Thai party members on Monday.Move Forward lawmakers voted against Mr. Srettha; they had announced earlier this month that they would do so because Pheu Thai was essentially extending military rule in Thailand. “There will never be a day that this crossbred government can make a difference in society,” Mr. Pita, 42, wrote on Facebook after Mr. Srettha was voted in on Tuesday.The question now is whether Mr. Srettha has the support to hold together an 11-party coalition government that is united in its determination to stop Move Forward but in agreement on little else. Analysts warn that such an unwieldy coalition could lead to more instability.Pheu Thai’s candidate, Srettha Thavisin, had to rely on the military’s support to secure enough votes to become prime minister.Lauren Decicca/Getty Images“It’s very much a government that’s held together by a common enemy, but that doesn’t make them automatically friends,” said Ken Mathis Lohatepanont, an independent political analyst who writes about Thai politics.Thailand’s neighbors and partners are watching developments with apprehension, fearing that political instability in one of the world’s most popular tourist destinations could derail economic cooperation.History warns that this is possible: For the past 70 years, Thai politics have been defined by a cycle of protests and coups — the country has had 13 successful coups in its modern history, and several more attempted ones. Except for Mr. Thaksin’s first term from 2001-2005 and Mr. Prayuth’s term, no government in Thailand has lasted its full term in the past two decades.Countries like the United States, which was quick to condemn Cambodia for a recent election that was deemed not to be free or fair, have been largely silent on the protracted election process in Thailand.Sunai Phasuk, a senior researcher on Thailand for Human Rights Watch, said the rights organization had been pressing the United States, the European Union and Australia to take a stronger stance but has been told these governments prefer a “wait and see” approach.Mr. Sunai added that the United States was probably being cautious about alienating Thailand to avoid driving it closer to China.Last month, the State Department said that it was “closely watching” developments in Thailand and that it was concerned about the recent legal cases against Mr. Pita, a graduate of Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Move Forward.One complaint before the Constitutional Court centers on the party’s effort to amend the royal defamation law, calling it tantamount to “attempting to overthrow the democratic system with His Majesty the King as the Head of State.”A ruling against the party could lead to its dissolution.The Election Commission is also investigating Mr. Pita to see if he was aware that he could not run for office because he owned shares in a now-defunct media company. If found guilty, he could be imprisoned for up to 10 years.Muktita Suhartono More

  • in

    The Trump-Free Debate That’s All About Trump

    Donald Trump may not be on the stage for tonight’s Republican primary debate, but at least eight other candidates will still have to contend with his presence — and his lead in the polls.The Opinion columnist Michelle Goldberg argues that tonight is an opportunity for Trump’s opponents to convince Republican voters that they can be as dominant as the former president, but without the legal baggage. The question remains, though: Will the Republican base buy it?Illustration by The New York Times; Photographs by Joe Buglewicz for The New York Times; Scott Morgan, Jim Young, Dan Koeck, Cheney Orr/Reuters; Ben Gray, Alex Brandon/Associated Press; Megan Varner/Getty ImagesThe 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.This Opinion Short was produced by Sophia Alvarez Boyd. It was edited by Stephanie Joyce and Kaari Pitkin. Mixing by Carole Sabouraud. Original music by Pat McCusker and Carole Sabouraud. Fact-checking by Mary Marge Locker. Special thanks to Shannon Busta, Kristina Samulewski and Annie-Rose Strasser. More

  • in

    European Climate Czar Steps Down to Take Part in Dutch Elections

    Frans Timmermans is stepping down at a crucial time for European climate laws to become the lead candidate for a left-wing coalition in the Dutch elections in November.Frans Timmermans, the European Union’s climate chief, will leave his position in Brussels to become a candidate in coming elections in the Netherlands, the European Commission announced on Tuesday.Mr. Timmermans’s immediate departure comes as the European Union is focusing on meeting climate goals, reducing emissions on the continent as well as transitioning to clean energy.Mr. Timmermans served as the executive vice president for the European Green Deal, a set of proposals that aims to make the E.U.’s climate, energy, transport and taxation policies fit for reducing net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 percent by 2030, compared with 1990 levels.Last month, European lawmakers approved a key element of the Green Deal that would require member nations to restore 20 percent of natural areas within their borders on land and at sea.“Climate change is happening even faster than feared, battering our planet with no region left unaffected,” Mr. Timmermans said in a speech in July. “Radical, immediate, and transformative action must be taken by all of us.”Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, praised Mr. Timmermans in a statement, saying he helped make strides toward “meeting the E.U.’s objectives to become the first climate neutral continent.” She also said he helped raise “the levels of climate ambition globally.”Ms. von der Leyen has appointed Maroš Šefčovič, a member of the European Commission from Slovakia, to succeed Mr. Timmermans as the executive vice president for the European Green Deal. Ms. von der Leyen also temporarily assigned the responsibility for climate action policy to Mr. Šefčovič, until the appointment of a new member of the commission of Dutch nationality, according to an announcement.Maros Sefcovic will succeed Mr. Timmermans as the executive vice-president for the European Green Deal.Tt News Agency, via ReutersOn Tuesday, Mr. Timmermans became the lead candidate for a left-wing alliance of the Green Party and the Labor Party, which are forming one bloc in the Netherlands’s parliamentary elections scheduled for Nov. 22. In that role, Mr. Timmermans could possibly become the Dutch prime minister. Members of the two parties overwhelmingly chose Mr. Timmermans as the lead candidate on Tuesday, according to Dutch media.Mr. Timmermans was scheduled to address members of the left-wing parties on Tuesday night as leader for the first time, according to the parties.“He is the right person to face the big challenges we stand for: protecting social security, tackle the climate crisis and restore trust in politics,” Attje Kuiken, the leader of the Dutch Labor Party in the House of Representatives, wrote on X, formerly Twitter. Ms. Kuiken has, like multiple other politicians since the government collapsed last month, announced her departure from Dutch politics.It’s not Mr. Timmermans’s first foray into Dutch politics. He has served as a member of Parliament for the Dutch Labor Party, as well as minister of foreign affairs from 2012 to 2014.The Green Deal has angered farmers on the continent, including in Mr. Timmermans’s native Netherlands. Last year, Dutch farmers protested against new goals and an announcement that some of them would have to shutter their farms to reach the E.U.’s climate goals, saying that they felt disproportionately targeted.The Dutch government collapsed in July after the parties in its ruling coalition failed to reach an agreement on migration policy. Other issues had been adding stress to the fractured coalition, including climate goals that aim to drastically reduce nitrogen emissions in the country, goals that have been partially set by the European Union.The Netherlands will soon have its first new prime minister since 2010, when Mark Rutte came into power. Mr. Rutte decided not to run again and said he would leave politics once a new coalition is in place after the November elections.Mr. Rutte’s departure from Dutch politics raised questions for the Netherlands, as well as the European Union, where Mr. Rutte found a stage to advance his country’s agenda: rules-based free trade and commerce, fiscal prudence, liberal social values.Who will take Mr. Rutte’s place as prime minister uncertain. The Farmer Citizen Movement, a Dutch pro-farming party that swept local elections in March, has been ahead in the polls, an indication of people’s dissatisfaction with mainstream political parties.On Sunday, Pieter Omtzigt, a popular Dutch politician who has been critical of Mr. Rutte, announced the creation of his new party, New Social Contract. A Dutch poll from this summer predicted that Mr. Omtzigt’s party could win as many as 46 seats in the Netherlands’s 150-member House of Representatives. More

  • in

    Zimbabwe Voters to Elect President While Trained Workers Flee

    Nurses, doctors and workers of all kinds are seeking to escape the country’s economic turmoil, an issue that has become a central theme in the election scheduled for Wednesday.The hospital where Warren George worked as a nurse in Zimbabwe was so short of basic supplies, like plaster, that he could not make casts to treat people with broken bones. He soon sought to join the exodus of more than 4,000 nurses who have fled the southern African nation in the past two years.But the government has refused to give him and many others the documents they would need to work in, say, Britain or Canada. He says that he now earns only about $500 a month as a traveling nurse and has to pick up extra shifts on his days off to ensure his family has enough to eat.Zimbabweans are scheduled to go to the polls on Wednesday in only the second election since Robert Mugabe, the liberation leader turned strongman president, was ousted in a coup.The vote amounts to a referendum on President Emmerson Mnangagwa, who is seeking a second term after, critics say, failing to steady the economy or stop the flight of workers, including a crippling “brain drain” of educated professionals. The departure of nurses and doctors has increased since the Covid pandemic, contributing to a widespread shortage of health workers on the African continent.Mr. Mnangagwa at an election rally in Harare this month. He is seeking a second term.Tsvangirayi Mukwazhi/Associated PressTriple-digit inflation has become the norm — it spiked to 176 percent in June. The country is $18 billion in debt and cannot get international loans because of political instability. Jobs are sparse, with economists estimating that 90 percent of work is informal. The local currency has become so worthless that the price grocery stores charge for bread has skyrocketed to 12,000 Zimbabwean dollars from 860 in April. Many use the U.S. dollar instead, when they can.“Everyone you meet in the streets, they are desperate to leave the country,” said Dr. Norman Matara, head of the Zimbabwe Association of Doctors for Human Rights, an advocacy organization.“Some of our colleagues have gone outside — you see them doing well in South Africa, in the U.K., in Canada,” he added. “You get the motivation to also leave because, honestly, we are just wasting our time.”This election, like past ones, is taking place in a jittery environment with fears of violence and of vote-rigging in favor of ZANU-PF, the party of Mr. Mnangagwa, which has governed Zimbabwe since independence in 1980.Mr. Mnangagwa came to power through a coup in 2017 that unseated Mr. Mugabe, who became increasingly autocratic during his nearly four decades in power. In the 2018 election, Mr. Mnangagwa eked out a victory, winning 50.8 percent of the vote over his closest rival, Nelson Chamisa, who is now president of the main opposition party, the Citizens Coalition for Change.Makeshift polling stations in Mbare, a township in Harare, on Monday.Siphiwe Sibeko/ReutersThis election is a rematch, and while polls suggest a tight race, many international and domestic observers doubt that the election will be free and fair.“It’s history repeating itself, except that ZANU-PF has perfected the system of rigging,” said Ibbo Mandaza, a political analyst in Harare, Zimbabwe’s capital, who runs an independent social-science think tank.The police have shut down dozens of rallies of the Citizens Coalition for Change and arrested dozens of its supporters. A new law that could result in the death penalty for Zimbabweans deemed to have betrayed the national interest has made many fearful to share their views.Even so, in surveys, Zimbabweans overwhelmingly say that they are dissatisfied with the direction of the country and the economy under Mr. Mnangagwa. If he prevails, political analysts say, there could be a surge in mass migration of Zimbabweans, straining other countries in the region — especially South Africa, where a struggling economy of its own has fueled violence against immigrants. Harare on Saturday. While polls suggest a tight vote, many international and domestic observers doubt that the election will be free and fair.John Wessels/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesMany African countries are short on health workers, more than any other region. The continent produces about 150,000 trained medical workers a year, but one in three cannot get jobs because there is not enough money to fund positions, according to James Avoka Asamani, who leads the World Health Organization’s work force team for Africa. The W.H.O. has identified 55 nations with critical shortages of health workers and suggests that foreign countries should not recruit from them. Thirty-seven of those nations are in Africa, including Zimbabwe, added this year, where the government estimates that the country will need at least an additional 69,000 medical workers by 2030.When Angela Khulu, an 84-year-old grandmother, was hit by a car recently and stumbled into a hospital in Bulawayo, in Zimbabwe’s south, most of the administrative nurses and hospital clerks were already ending their day shifts. She waited in a long line while the few medical workers on duty bounced between patients.Praying for a peaceful election during a church service in Harare on Sunday.John Wessels/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAfter two hours, with pain radiating down her left side, she was seen by a doctor, who recommended checking for internal bleeding. But the hospital, Mpilo Central, did not have enough radiographers — or X-ray films — so, despite her serious symptoms, she was sent home and told to come back the following day.Dr. Tawanda Mapfumo, who works at Mpilo Central, says he has become accustomed to the chaos at the hospital, where about three dozen patients cram onto wooden benches in the corridors and waiting rooms. He says he cannot shake the guilt of seeing patients die because there are no resources to treat them.Those trying conditions have created an opening for Britain, in particular, to lure away Zimbabwean health workers. Nearly 22,000 Zimbabweans have received health care work visas from Britain over the past three years (though not everyone who receives one actually moves).Britain’s recruitment has drawn the ire of Zimbabwe’s government. In April, the vice president, Constantino Chiwenga, who is also the health minister, suggested introducing a law to criminalize the recruitment of Zimbabwean health workers by foreign countries. No law has been formally introduced yet.But within the past two years, health workers in Zimbabwe said, the Health Ministry has made it more difficult for them to get the letters of good standing they need to be hired abroad.A 31-year-old doctor, who requested anonymity to avoid trouble with the Zimbabwean government, said that in 2020, when he applied for his letter to move to Namibia to practice, he paid $40 and received the letter the same day.But when he sought another letter from the Zimbabwean authorities in early 2021 to move from Namibia to South Africa for more training, he was confronted with a fee of $150 and a five-page form with questions he considered intrusive. He filled out the form and paid but has still not received his letter.A hospital in Harare last year. The W.H.O. has identified 55 nations with critical shortages of health workers. Thirty-seven of those countries are in Africa, including Zimbabwe.Jekesai Njikizana/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesNonetheless, he said he was fortunate because he still works in Namibia, where his $3,000 monthly salary is roughly 10 times what he made in Zimbabwe.“It’s not worth your time or dignity,” he said, referring to the poor pay in Zimbabwe.The Zimbabwean Health Ministry did not respond to requests for comment. Christopher Mutsvangwa, spokesman for ZANU-PF, said that the government was not opposed to citizens going abroad for jobs but that it needed to control the flow to ensure that some skilled workers remained.Despite the government’s barriers, Zimbabweans are still finding ways to flee.Wynter Banda swapped her life as a hairdresser in Harare to become a nursing home aide in Britain. She and her husband, Godwill, a teacher, sold their car and borrowed from friends to come up with the $5,000 she needed for the visa fee and other moving expenses.Her husband eventually joined her and works as a science teacher. Things are tight, she said, because of debt and high rent. Still, she said they had made the right decision.“Even though it’s not easy and the working hours are very long and stressful, I can’t imagine going back to Zimbabwe,” she said. “We suffered there.”Studying during a power cut in Harare last year. Critics say that Mr. Mnangagwa’s government has failed to steady the economy or stop the flight of workers.Associated PressJeffrey Moyo More

  • in

    ¿Qué sigue en Ecuador y Guatemala?

    ¿Qué sigue en Ecuador y Guatemala?Dos países votaron, la historia de una fotografía y más para el martes.Dos países latinoamericanos fueron a las urnas el domingo. Ecuador y Guatemala pusieron a prueba sus sistemas democráticos en votaciones muy esperadas. Esto es lo que hay que saber sobre lo que estaba en juego y los resultados:Bernardo Arévalo obtuvo una aplastante victoria en Guatemala con el 58 por ciento de los votos frente al 37 por ciento que obtuvo Sandra Torres, una ex primera dama asociada con las élites conservadoras que gobiernan el país.Ciudad de Guatemala el domingo por la noche.Pilar Olivares/ReutersLa contienda a la presidencia de Guatemala, particularmente en la segunda vuelta, estuvo ensombrecida por la represión del poder judicial, la descalificación de candidatos opositores y la censura a los medios de comunicación. Aquí puedes leer las claves de los comicios.Arévalo, ahora presidente electo, se postuló por el Movimiento Semilla con una plataforma anticorrupción y aunque su base era mayoritariamente de profesionales urbanos, logró atraer a una mayoría de los votantes, lo que demuestra el rechazo a la clase gobernante.Ecuador, por su parte, irá a segunda vuelta en octubre para elegir a su próximo presidente, que gobernará hasta 2025. Será un enfrentamiento entre Luisa González, candidata de izquierda respaldada por el correísmo, y Daniel Noboa, un acaudalado empresario con poca experiencia política que fue la sorpresa de las votaciones.En los comicios ecuatorianos, que se celebraron de manera anticipada luego de que el presidente Guillermo Lasso disolvió la Asamblea Nacional en medio de denuncias de malversación de fondos y un proceso de destitución, el tema dominante fue la inseguridad. Ecuador se ha convertido en un país donde la violencia del narcotráfico ha empezado a causar estragos a todo nivel: desde la seguridad ciudadana, pasando por la extorsión a pequeños negocios y el reciente asesinato de un aspirante presidencial.Los votantes ecuatorianos también aprobaron que se dejen de explotar las reservas petroleras de una zona en el Parque Nacional Yasuní, uno de los lugares con más riqueza ecológica del planeta, donde viven comunidades indígenas no contactadas. El resultado del referéndum es vinculante y los expertos dicen que la paraestatal Petroecuador deberá retirarse de la zona en el próximo año y medio, aunque es posible que demore hasta una década en desmantelar completamente la operación.Simon Romero, Genevieve Glatsky y Jody García escribieron este resumen poselectoral sobre Guatemala y Ecuador en el que señalan que ambas elecciones tuvieron escenarios imprevistos. Los procesos electorales en los dos países “destacaron una tendencia regional más general: la incertidumbre y volatilidad de la política latinoamericana”.La segunda vuelta en Ecuador está programada para el 15 de octubre y el Tribunal Supremo Electoral de Guatemala hará la declaración oficial de los resultados próximamente.Integrantes del pueblo waorani promovían en Quito, la capital de Ecuador, responder “sí” en la consulta popular a mediados del mes.Dolores Ochoa/Associated PressSi alguien te reenvió este correo, puedes hacer clic aquí para recibirlo tres veces por semana.La historia de una fotoFederico Rios para The New York TimesHace algunos meses publicamos una imagen de Federico Rios como parte de un reportaje sobre la travesía migrante a través del peligroso Tapón del Darién, el tramo de selva que separa a Panamá de Colombia. Ahora, Federico ha escrito un texto sobre los protagonistas de la imagen.— More

  • in

    Thai Ex-Prime Minister Returns From Exile, Adding to Political Chaos

    Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted in a coup in 2006, has come back to Thailand at a time when the country is struggling to elect a new leader.Thaksin Shinawatra, the former premier who was ousted in a coup and has been living in exile since 2006, returned to Bangkok for the first time in 15 years on Tuesday, adding to the country’s political drama on a day that Parliament was to vote for a new prime minister.Mr. Thaksin was living in self-imposed exile in part to avoid facing corruption and abuse of power charges affiliated with his telecom business. While in exile, he shuttled between England, Hong Kong and Dubai, avoiding Thailand for fear of not receiving a fair trial. He was tried for most of these cases in absentia and found guilty of several charges.Mr. Thaksin’s private jet arrived Tuesday morning at the Don Muang International Airport in Bangkok. And his landing comes after months of a political logjam that has left the country without a clear leadership candidate after the top vote-winner in the May general election was functionally blocked from office by allies of the country’s military and monarchy.His return reflects the degree of confidence that he has in his party, Pheu Thai, to form a government and elect a new prime minister this week. Srettha Thavisin, a real estate tycoon and a close ally of Mr. Thaksin, has been nominated for the job by Pheu Thai, but it remains unclear if he will win the post once voting is done on Tuesday.Pheu Thai’s candidates Srettha Thavisin, left, and Paetongtarn Shinawatra, the daughter of Mr. Thaksin, at a rally in Bangkok in May. Jorge Silva/ReutersAt a news conference on Sunday, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, Mr. Thaksin’s youngest daughter, said her father would not be involved in politics once he returned to Thailand. But few Thai voters believe that claim.Mr. Thaksin, a charismatic 74-year-old billionaire, is the founder of Pheu Thai, which still looks to him for guidance, according to party members. His policies remain popular in Thailand, where many Thais recall his populist agenda fondly, particularly his $1 health care program and the disbursement of loans to farmers when he was prime minister from 2001 to 2006.But more recently, Pheu Thai supporters have felt betrayed by the party’s moves to partner with the military in order to form a new government and elect a prime minister.Earlier this month, Pheu Thai abandoned its main coalition partner, the progressive Move Forward Party, which won the general election in May. Move Forward had refused to withdraw its pledge to revise a law that criminalizes criticism of the powerful Thai monarchy, an institution fiercely backed by conservatives and the military.Thai soldiers standing guard in front of the Royal Plaza in Bangkok after the military seized power from Mr. Thaksin in a coup in 2006.Pornchai Kittiwongsakul/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesUntil now, Pheu Thai had vowed never to partner with military-backed parties in Parliament.Despite his influence, Mr. Thaksin no longer has the same hold over the Thai public that he did a decade ago. A generation of young Thais see him as a self-serving politician obsessed with orchestrating an elaborate homecoming. In his absence, other charismatic figures like Pita Limjaroenrat, the leader of the Move Forward Party, have risen, appealing to an electorate disillusioned with the politics of the old.In 2008, Mr. Thaksin made a brief return to Thailand after his political allies won an election. During that time, he and his then-wife, Potjaman Na Pombejra, were tried on a conflict of interest case over a plot of land that was sold to Ms. Potjaman. He fled to London before the guilty verdict was handed down. More

  • in

    Elecciones en Ecuador y Guatemala en 4 conclusiones

    A los “outsiders” les fue mejor de lo esperado, lo que subraya la volatilidad de la política latinoamericana. A los candidatos que llamaron a emular las medidas enérgicas contra el crimen de El Salvador no les fue bien.El domingo, Ecuador y Guatemala celebraron elecciones que dejaron en evidencia algunas tendencias cruciales en América Latina como los esfuerzos anticorrupción, la creciente importancia de los votantes jóvenes y los llamados a emular las medidas enérgicas contra el crimen de El Salvador.En Ecuador, donde el asesinato del candidato presidencial Fernando Villavicencio este mes ensombreció la campaña, una política de la izquierda tradicional, Luisa González, se enfrentará en una segunda vuelta a Daniel Noboa, el heredero de una familia adinerada conocida por su imperio bananero.Y en Guatemala, el activista progresista y anticorrupción Bernardo Arévalo ganó la segunda vuelta de las elecciones presidenciales de manera aplastante contra una ex primera dama, Sandra Torres, asestando así un golpe al establishment político conservador del país.Debido a las preocupaciones latentes sobre la erosión del Estado de derecho y la influencia cada vez mayor de las bandas narcotraficantes en diferentes partes de América Latina, la votación fue observada de cerca en busca de señales de lo que podrían significar los resultados.A continuación, presentamos algunas conclusiones clave.El presidente de El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, ha tomado medidas enérgicas contra la violencia de las pandillas mediante arrestos masivos que perjudicaron a miles de personas inocentes.Brittainy Newman para The New York TimesLa delincuencia no fue el único tema en la mente de los votantesEcuador y Guatemala enfrentan una variedad de retos diferentes, y aunque las dificultades para gobernar de manera efectiva en ambos países son bien conocidas, los nuevos líderes tendrán que lidiar con tener bajo control el crimen organizado y crear oportunidades económicas para mantener a sus ciudadanos en casa y evitar que emigren.La estrella del momento en la escena política de América Latina es el presidente populista conservador de El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, debido a su éxito en el uso de tácticas de línea dura para sofocar la violencia de las pandillas, incluidos arrestos masivos que afectaron a miles de personas inocentes y erosionaron las libertades civiles. Pero las expectativas de que los entusiastas de las tácticas de Bukele sobre el crimen tendrían un camino fácil hacia la victoria se desvanecieron tanto en Ecuador como en Guatemala.“Es notable que en ninguno de los dos casos les haya ido bien a los admiradores descarados de las políticas severas de Nayib Bukele contra las bandas criminales en El Salvador”, dijo Michael Shifter, miembro principal de Diálogo Intermericano, una organización de investigación con sede en Washington.A pesar de la conmoción generada por el asesinato de Villavicencio, los candidatos explícitamente anticrimen en Ecuador dividieron su porción de los votos. A Jan Topic, quien se alineó estrechamente con Bukele, le fue mal a pesar de haber subido en las encuestas tras el asesinato.“Hizo una campaña de un solo tema que, en su mayoría, se enfocó en la seguridad”, dijo Risa Grais-Targow, directora para América Latina de Eurasia Group, sobre Topic. “Pero los votantes tienen otras preocupaciones, como las relacionadas con la economía”.De manera similar, en Guatemala —donde crecían los temores de un descenso hacia el autoritarismo— la promesa de Torres de implementar políticas al estilo de Bukele no logró ganar mucho impulso. En cambio, su rival la puso a la defensiva debido a que había pasado un tiempo bajo arresto domiciliario en relación con cargos de financiamiento ilícito de campañas.También influyeron en el resultado las maniobras de la autoridad electoral de Guatemala para simplemente descalificar a los candidatos que se consideraron amenazas al orden establecido.Uno de los candidatos expulsados de la contienda antes de la primera vuelta en junio fue Carlos Pineda, un outsider que buscaba replicar las medidas enérgicas contra el crimen de Bukele. La descalificación de Pineda y otros le abrió un camino a Arévalo, otro candidato independiente cuyas propuestas para combatir el delito son más matizadas.Los candidatos guatemaltecos intentaron capitalizar el apoyo de los jóvenes.Daniele Volpe para The New York TimesLos votantes jóvenes influyen en las eleccionesEn un grado notable, los resultados electorales en Ecuador y Guatemala dependieron de las decisiones de los votantes jóvenes. En Ecuador, Noboa, un empresario de 35 años, neófito de la política, estaba en los últimos lugares de las encuestas hasta hace apenas unas semanas.Pero aprovechando el apoyo de los jóvenes mientras se presentaba como un candidato independiente, Noboa se abrió camino inesperadamente hacia la segunda vuelta con cerca del 24 por ciento de los votos. (El reconocimiento de su apellido también podría haber ayudado; su padre, Álvaro Noboa, uno de los hombres más ricos de Ecuador, se postuló a la presidencia en cinco oportunidades).En Guatemala, el país más poblado de América Central, Arévalo, de 64 años, también se benefició del apoyo de los jóvenes, especialmente en las ciudades, quienes se sintieron atraídos por sus llamados a poner fin a la persecución política de activistas de derechos humanos, ambientalistas, periodistas, fiscales y jueces.Arévalo también mostró una postura más moderada sobre temas sociales. Aunque dijo que no buscaría legalizar el aborto o el matrimonio igualitario, dejó claro que su gobierno no permitiría la discriminación contra las personas por su orientación sexual.Esa postura, algo novedosa en Guatemala, contrastó en gran manera con la de Torres, quien seleccionó a un pastor evangélico como su compañero de fórmula y empleó un insulto contra personas homosexuales en la campaña electoral para referirse a los simpatizantes de Arévalo.Luisa González enfrentará a Daniel Noboa en la segunda vuelta de las elecciones en Ecuador.Johanna Alarcón para The New York TimesLa izquierda va en diferentes direccionesGuatemala y Ecuador ofrecieron visiones contrastantes de la izquierda en América Latina.Dentro del panorama político tradicionalmente conservador de Guatemala, Arévalo, quien critica gobiernos de izquierda como el de Nicaragua, a menudo es descrito como un progresista. En ese sentido se parece más a Gabriel Boric, el presidente joven y moderado de Chile, que a los agitadores de otras zonas de la región.El partido de Arévalo, Movimiento Semilla, el cual se formó tras las protestas anticorrupción en 2015, también es diferente a cualquier otro movimiento surgido en Guatemala durante las últimas décadas. Semilla llamó la atención por realizar una campaña austera y de principios, dejando claras sus fuentes de financiamiento, a diferencia del financiamiento opaco que prevalece en otros partidos. Otra fuente de inspiración para Semilla es el Frente Amplio de Uruguay, un partido de centro izquierda moderado y democrático.“Arévalo es un demócrata de pies a cabeza”, aseveró Will Freeman, miembro de estudios latinoamericanos del Consejo de Relaciones Exteriores.González, en contraste, proviene de un sector diferente de la izquierda latinoamericana, caracterizado en el caso de Ecuador por poner a prueba los controles y equilibrios democráticos, dijo Freeman. Es partidaria de Rafael Correa, un expresidente ecuatoriano que sigue siendo una fuerza dominante en la política del país a pesar de tener seis años fuera del poder.Correa, quien vive en Bélgica tras huir de una sentencia de prisión de ocho años por violaciones en el financiamiento de campañas, conserva una base sólida que oscila entre el 20 y el 30 por ciento del electorado.En gran medida, ese apoyo es resultado de la “nostalgia de ese momento de bienestar que hubo durante la era de Correa”, dijo Caroline Ávila, analista política en Ecuador.Arévalo obtuvo más votos que cualquier otro candidato en Guatemala desde que se restableció la democracia en el país en 1985.Daniele Volpe para The New York TimesLa imprevisibilidad marcó las contiendasLas elecciones tanto en Ecuador como en Guatemala destacaron una tendencia regional más general: la incertidumbre y volatilidad de la política latinoamericana.En ambos países, las encuestas fallaron en captar desarrollos cruciales. En Ecuador, donde Topic capitalizó las consecuencias del asesinato de Villavicencio, Noboa se abrió camino para pasar a la segunda vuelta.Y en Guatemala, Arévalo, un candidato académico que a veces lee sus discursos y carece de las habilidades oratorias de sus rivales, no fue visto como una amenaza por el establishment hasta que logró pasar a la segunda vuelta.Hoy, con su aplastante victoria, Arévalo obtuvo más votos que cualquier otro candidato desde que se restauró la democracia en Guatemala en 1985.Ese es un escenario que incluso muchos miembros del propio partido de Arévalo no vieron venir.Simon Romero More