International Relations

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Netanyahu’s Party Leads but Faces Obstacles to Forming Government

      by

      Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s party took a lead in Israel’s fourth election in two years, but updated exit polls projected a stalemate that could extend Israel’s political deadlock.JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s party held a lead in Israel’s fourth election in two years, exit polls projected Wednesday, but neither his right-wing alliance nor a diverse bloc of opposition parties had a clear path to a majority coalition, creating a stalemate that could extend Israel’s political deadlock for weeks if not months.Two of the three polls by Israeli broadcasters gave Mr. Netanyahu’s conservative Likud party and his wider right-wing and religious bloc 53 seats in Israel’s Parliament — 60 when adding seven seats he might get from an independent candidate. That still fell short of the 61 needed to form a majority in the 120-seat Parliament.The third poll gave the anti-Netanyahu bloc of parties an edge of 61 seats, potentially blocking Mr. Netanyahu’s path to victory and making the election too close to call.The anti-Netanyahu camp is made up of ideologically disparate parties, which will hinder their attempts to replace him. Some have already rejected the possibility of cooperating with others.The muddy result could extend the period of political uncertainty and polarization that has sent Israel reeling from election to election to election, failing each time to return a stable government.And it could lead to a fifth election.Naftali Bennett, leader of the New Right party and his wife, Gilat, outside a polling station in the city of Raanana.Gil Cohen-Magen/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“The path to power for the next prime minister is very difficult,” said Mitchell Barak, a Jerusalem-based pollster and political analyst. “It’s not just the numbers but the self-constraints that each party has placed on who they can sit with. They have painted themselves into a corner.”Final results are not expected until the end of the week, and could easily change the outcome.Addressing his supporters in a half-empty hall at 2:30 a.m. Wednesday, Mr. Netanyahu stopped short of declaring victory.“This evening we have brought a tremendous achievement,” he said. “We have made Likud the largest party in Israel by a very large margin.”Mr. Netanyahu sought re-election even as he was on trial on corruption charges, an unprecedented situation that may have dimmed his prospects.Israel’s seemingly endless political impasse is partly rooted in the nature of its election system, which allocates parliamentary seats according to each party’s share of the vote, making it easy for smaller parties to enter Parliament, and hard for larger parties to form a majority.But the stasis is also the result of Mr. Netanyahu’s refusal to resign despite standing trial over accusations of bribery, fraud and breach of trust. That decision has split the right-wing bloc that has kept Mr. Netanyahu in power for the past 12 years, and divided voters and parties less by political ideology than by their attitude toward Mr. Netanyahu himself.Mr. Netanyahu, right, with his lawyer at the Jerusalem district court last month.Pool photo by Reuven CastroSince neither Mr. Netanyahu nor his opponents could win a majority in the three previous elections, in 2019 and 2020, Mr. Netanyahu remained in power, first as a caretaker prime minister, and then at the helm of a shaky unity government with some of his fiercest critics.The election was conducted against a backdrop of profound political gridlock, with the current cabinet so dysfunctional that it could not agree on a state budget for two consecutive years, nor the appointment of key state officials, including the state attorney and the senior officials at the justice and finance ministries.Two of Mr. Netanyahu’s main challengers, Gideon Saar and Naftali Bennett, are right-wingers who once worked closely with the prime minister. But neither appeared to be in a position to try to form a government.Mr. Saar, a former Likud interior minister who broke with Mr. Netanyahu over the prime minister’s refusal to step down after being charged with corruption, won only six seats and his chances as a contender seemed to have waned.As the political horse-trading and coalition-building get underway, Mr. Netanyahu is expected to try to procure defections from other parties, including Mr. Saar’s, in a quest to tip the scales.It will be up to Reuven Rivlin, Israel’s largely ceremonial president, to invite the lawmaker he believes has the best chance of forming a coalition to begin that process.While presidents have usually assigned that duty to leader of the largest party, Mr. Rivlin could still grant it to another lawmaker who he thinks has a better route to a majority. That could be Yair Lapid, the centrist leader of the opposition, whose party was projected to win between 17 and 18 seats.Voters waiting in line to cast their ballots in Tel Aviv on Tuesday.Gil Cohen-Magen/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“At the moment, Netanyahu doesn’t have 61 seats, but the change bloc does,” Mr. Lapid said early Wednesday. He added, “I’ve started speaking to party leaders and we’ll wait for the results, but we’ll do everything to create a sane government in Israel.”Mr. Netanyahu’s fortunes depend heavily on Mr. Bennett, once his chief of staff.Throughout the campaign, Mr. Bennett refused to clarify whether he would back a coalition led by Mr. Netanyahu. But he said he would refuse to serve under Mr. Lapid, and analysts believe he could be persuaded to back Mr. Netanyahu.Speaking to his supporters early Wednesday, Mr. Bennett maintained his ambiguity, saying only that he would “wait patiently” for the final results.If he does return to power, Mr. Netanyahu has promised to enact sweeping legal reforms that would limit the power of the judiciary, and which his opponents fear would allow him to circumvent his corruption trial. Mr. Netanyahu’s colleagues have prevaricated in recent days about whether he would use his office to avoid prosecution, with one minister on Saturday refusing to rule it out.Mr. Netanyahu denies any wrongdoing and that he would try to change the law to derail the trial.Any new government will immediately face substantive challenges, including an economy bruised by the pandemic, rising violent crime in Arab communities and potential threats from Iran. Diplomatically, Israel is trying to block the resurrection of the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran, which the United States government generally favors and which Israel considers inadequate.And Israel will urgently need to adopt a new national budget for 2021, since the previous government failed to, a failure that led to its collapse.Mr. Netanyahu before casting his ballot at a polling station.Pool photo by Ronen ZvulunThe vote followed a campaign that centered on the suitability of Mr. Netanyahu himself, rather than on more existential or ideological questions like the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or how to bridge the divide between secular and religious Israelis.Mr. Netanyahu presented himself as the only candidate able to deter what many Israelis see as the threats posed by Iran. He also sought to distinguish himself as a statesman who had cemented diplomatic relations with four Arab states and brought a world-leading vaccination program to Israel, helping the country to emerge recently into something approaching normal life.It was a message that resonated with many voters.“Bibi is the only leader in this country in my eyes,” said Elad Shnezik, a 24-year-old foreign-exchange trader who voted for Likud in Tzur Hadassah, a suburb west of Jerusalem. “I have never seen anything bad in his actions. Everything he does, he does for the people.”But turnout was the lowest since 2013, about 67 percent, as some voters appeared to tire of the relentless election cycle.“The only one excited about going out to vote today is our dog, who is getting an extra walk this morning,” said Gideon Zehavi, 54, a psychologist from Rehovot in central Israel.Turnout was projected to be particularly low among the Arab minority, according to some Arab pollsters. Some said they were deflated by a split within the main Arab political alliance, which reduced the collective power of Arab lawmakers.“My honest opinion is it’s not worth wasting my time to vote for any of the parties,” said Amir Younes, 32, a restaurant worker in Jaffa. “We have been through this show many times before and the result is the same.”Mr. Netanyahu’s attempts to position himself as a diplomatic trailblazer were dampened in the final days of the campaign, after a planned photo-opportunity in Abu Dhabi with the leadership of the United Arab Emirates fell through, amid Emirati frustration about being used as a prop in Mr. Netanyahu’s re-election campaign.And Mr. Netanyahu’s pandemic leadership brought him as much criticism as praise. Though he presided over a successful vaccine rollout, he was accused of playing politics with other aspects of the pandemic response. In January, he resisted giving significantly larger fines to people who broke antivirus measures, a policy that would have disproportionately affected ultra-Orthodox Israelis. Ultra-Orthodox parties form about a quarter of Mr. Netanyahu’s right-wing alliance, and he needs their support to form a coalition.Mr. Netanyahu searched for every last vote, even from ideologically incoherent sections of society. Despite previously scorning and ignoring Israel’s Arab minority, which forms about 20 percent of the population, Mr. Netanyahu pushed hard in this electoral cycle for their support, presenting himself as the only person who could end the endemic violence and inequality that affects many Arab communities.But simultaneously, he agreed to an electoral pact with a far-right alliance, whose leaders include Itamar Ben Gvir, a hard-line nationalist who until recently hung in his living room a portrait of Baruch Goldstein, an extremist who murdered 29 Palestinians in a mosque in the West Bank in 1994.Reporting was contributed by Adam Rasgon, Myra Noveck, Irit Pazner Garshowitz and Gabby Sobelman. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Tensions With Arab Allies Undermine a Netanyahu Pitch to Israeli Voters

      by

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

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Future of Pacific Islands Forum Is in Doubt After Palau's Exit

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyPacific Islands’ Most Important Megaphone Falls Into DiscordThe future of an 18-nation group is in doubt after Palau abandoned it over a leadership dispute.A photo released by the Australian prime minister’s office showing leaders at the Pacific Islands Forum in Tuvalu in 2019.Credit…Adam Taylor/Australian Prime Minister’s Office, via Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesFeb. 5, 2021, 3:43 a.m. ETSYDNEY, Australia — The Pacific Islands’ most important regional body is on the brink of collapse after a dispute over the election of a new leader led the nation of Palau to abandon the organization and announce the withdrawal of its embassy from Fiji.Other Micronesian countries may follow Palau out of the group, the Pacific Islands Forum, which could hinder momentum on addressing climate change. The forum has long been the region’s megaphone, shouting for action on the world stage as those who live on hundreds of islands are inundated by rising seas and pummeled by more catastrophic storms.“They’ve said in the past that the relationship in the Pacific is unique — it’s like a family,” said Jonathan Pryke, the director of the Pacific Islands Program at the Lowy Institute, an independent think tank in Sydney. “To have a family member leave altogether, it’s just a very bad sign.”The forum was founded in 1971 as a representative body for the South Pacific, then expanded in 1999 to include the North Pacific, and divisions within the 18-nation organization (now 17 and shrinking) are not uncommon. Fiji was suspended from the group after a coup in 2009, returning in 2015. Six years ago, a dispute about who would lead the group as its secretary-general was resolved only after a walk and a long talk among a handful of influential leaders.But this year, because of the pandemic, that was not possible. Covid kept the Pacific family apart: The annual forum was conducted over Zoom, and the dozens of in-person meetings that usually precede the gathering did not happen.Mr. Pryke said that lack of connection seemed to have contributed to the explosion of long-simmering frustrations.In general, the countries of Micronesia in the North Pacific — with smaller populations and economies — have complained of being sidelined by the larger countries to the south, including Fiji, New Zealand and Australia.To help manage that, the forum developed a tradition of rotating the secretary-general position among leaders from Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia.This week, that protocol broke down into a heated free-for-all.A flurry of candidates emerged in early votes, and Thursday’s final election elevated a former prime minister of the Cook Islands, Henry Puna, to the role of secretary-general. In simple terms, it was Micronesia’s turn, but its candidate, Gerald Zackios, the Marshall Islands’ ambassador to the United States, lost the final tally by one vote.Publicly, the forum said its decision had been driven by strong support for Mr. Puna.Surangel Whipps Jr., Palau’s president, described the result as an act of disrespect.“The process regarding the appointment of the secretary-general has clearly indicated to the Republic of Palau that unity, regionalism and the ‘Pacific Way’ no longer guide the forum,” he said.Mr. Pryke at the Lowy Institute called the absence of consensus “a step backward” for the group, at a time when unity is especially important.“The Pacific is facing major existential crises, the foremost of which is climate change,” he said. “They have been vocal advocates worldwide, far above their size and stature, and it’s largely because of the unity you see in the Pacific — which appears to be rapidly unwinding.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      El legado de Trump para Biden: un mundo trastocado

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutLatest UpdatesInside the SiegeVisual TimelineNotable ArrestsCapitol Police in CrisisAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyAnálisis de NoticiasEl legado de Trump para Biden: un mundo trastocadoEl país perdió su brillo internacional. Las políticas trumpistas de “Estados Unidos primero” impulsaron a otras naciones a ponerse a sí mismas en primer lugar también. Pero apostar contra la capacidad estadounidense de reinvención nunca ha sido una buena idea.El presidente Trump con otros líderes del G7 en Canadá en 2018. Sus posiciones sobre “Estados Unidos primero” impulsaron a otras naciones a ponerse también en primer lugar.Credit…Jesco Denzel/Gobierno alemán, vía Agence France-Presse — Getty Images21 de enero de 2021 a las 12:02 ETRead in EnglishPARÍS — La mayoría de los países perdieron la paciencia hace tiempo. Los aliados consideraban inaceptables, cuando no sencillamente insultantes, los arrebatos erráticos del presidente Donald Trump. Incluso rivales como China y Rusia se sorprendieron ante los tropiezos de las políticas volátiles del presidente. Trump declaró en 2016 que Estados Unidos debe ser “más impredecible”. Y lo cumplió.El repentino encaprichamiento con el gobernante estalinista norcoreano, Kim Jong-un, la sumisión ante el presidente de Rusia, Vladimir Putin, la obsesión con el “virus chino”, el entusiasmo por la fractura de la Unión Europea y el aparente abandono de los valores democráticos fundamentales de Estados Unidos fueron tan impactantes que casi todos ven la salida de Trump de la Casa Blanca del miércoles con alivio.A Estados Unidos se le quitó el brillo, los ideales democráticos están desprovistos de fondo. La huella de Trump en el mundo permanecerá. Aunque abundan las denuncias apasionadas, hay un legado del trumpismo que no se desvanecerá con facilidad en algunos círculos. Mediante su obsesión con “Estados Unidos primero”, incitó a otras naciones a ponerse primero también. No volverán a alinearse con Estados Unidos en el corto plazo. La fractura al interior del país que Trump avivó permanecerá y debilitará la proyección del poder estadounidense.“Trump es un delincuente, un pirómano político que debería ser enviado a un tribunal penal”, comentó Jean Asselborn, ministro de Relaciones Exteriores de Luxemburgo, en una entrevista de radio. “Es una persona que fue electa democráticamente, pero a quien la democracia no le interesa en lo más mínimo”.El uso de ese tipo de lenguaje por parte de un aliado europeo para referirse a un presidente estadounidense habría sido impensable antes de que Trump hiciera de la indignación el tema central de su presidencia, junto con el ataque a la verdad. Su negación de un hecho —la derrota en las elecciones de noviembre— fue vista por gobernantes como Angela Merkel, la canciller alemana, como lo que desató el asalto del Capitolio el 6 de enero por parte de los seguidores de Trump.Una turba frenética en el santuario interno de la democracia estadounidense fue para muchos países como ver a Roma saqueada por los visigodos. Para los observadores extranjeros, Estados Unidos ha caído. Los desatinos imprudentes de Trump, en medio de una pandemia, le heredan a Joe Biden, el presidente entrante, una gran incertidumbre mundial.Una turba de simpatizantes de Trump asalta el edificio del Capitolio. Las escenas conmocionaron a observadores de todo el mundo.Credit…Jason Andrew para The New York Times“La era posterior a la Guerra Fría ha llegado a su fin tras 30 años y ahora se desarrolla una era más compleja y desafiante: ¡un mundo en peligro!”, dijo Wolfgang Ischinger, presidente de la Conferencia de Seguridad de Múnich.El talento de Trump para los insultos innecesarios se sintió en todo el mundo. En Mbour, una población costera en Senegal, Rokhaya Dabo, administradora escolar, dijo: “No hablo inglés, pero me sentí ofendida cuando dijo que África era una pocilga”. En Roma, Piera Marini, quien elabora sombreros para su tienda en Via Giulia, dijo que se alegró de saber que Trump se iría: “Tan solo la manera en que trataba a las mujeres era escalofriante”.“Biden necesita abordar el restablecimiento de la democracia en casa de una manera humilde que les permita a los europeos decir que tenemos problemas similares y que por ello debemos salir de esto juntos”, dijo en una entrevista Nathalie Tocci, una politóloga italiana. “Con Trump, de repente, los europeos nos convertimos en el enemigo”, agregó.A pesar de ello, hasta el final, el nacionalismo de Trump tuvo seguidores. Oscilaban desde la mayoría de los israelíes, a quienes les gustaba su apoyo incondicional, hasta aspirantes a autócratas de Hungría a Brasil para quienes era el líder carismático de una contrarrevolución contra la democracia liberal.Trump era el candidato preferido por el 70 por ciento de los israelíes antes de las elecciones de noviembre, según una encuesta del Instituto de la Democracia de Israel. “Los israelíes tienen aprensión por lo que hay más allá del gobierno de Trump”, dijo Shalom Lipner, que durante mucho tiempo trabajó como funcionario en la oficina del primer ministro. Tienen sus razones. Trump fue despectivo con la causa palestina. Ayudó a Israel a normalizar las relaciones con varios estados árabes. Trump era el candidato preferido por el 70% de los israelíes antes de las elecciones de noviembreCredit…Ariel Schalit/Associated PressEn otros lugares, el apoyo a Trump era ideológico. Él era el símbolo de una gran sacudida nacionalista y autócrata. Personificaba una revuelta contra las democracias occidentales, consideradas el lugar donde la familia, la Iglesia, la nación y las nociones tradicionales del matrimonio y el género van a morir. Se resistió a la migración masiva, la diversidad y la erosión del dominio del hombre blanco.Uno de los impulsores de Trump, el presidente nacionalista brasileño Jair Bolsonaro, afirmó este mes que en las elecciones estadounidenses “hubo gente que votó tres, cuatro veces, votó gente muerta”. En una ilustración del papel de Trump como facilitador de autócratas, Bolsonaro pasó a cuestionar la integridad del sistema de votación de Brasil.Viktor Orban, primer ministro húngaro antiinmigrante y firme partidario de Trump, dijo a Reuters el año pasado que los demócratas habían impuesto el “imperialismo moral” al mundo. Aunque felicitó a Biden por su victoria, las relaciones de Orban con el nuevo presidente serán seguramente tensas.Esta batalla cultural mundial continuará porque las condiciones de esta erupción —la inseguridad, la desaparición de los empleos, el resentimiento en sociedades en las que crece la desigualdad debido al impacto de la COVID-19— continúan desde Francia hasta Latinoamérica. El fenómeno Trump también continúa. Sus decenas de millones de seguidores no desaparecerán pronto.“¿Los acontecimientos en el Capitolio fueron la apoteosis y el trágico punto final de los cuatro años de Trump o el acto inaugural de una nueva violencia política estadounidense impulsada por una energía peligrosa?”, preguntó François Delattre, secretario general del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Francia. “No lo sabemos y debemos preocuparnos por los países con crisis similares en sus modelos democráticos”.Francia es uno de esos países donde hay una creciente confrontación tribal. Si el Departamento de Justicia de Estados Unidos pudo politizarse, si los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de las Enfermedades pudieron aniquilarse y si 147 miembros electos del Congreso pudieron votar para anular los resultados de la elección incluso después de un ataque al Capitolio, hay motivos para creer que en otras sociedades fracturadas de la posverdad puede pasar cualquier cosa.“Cómo llegamos aquí? De manera gradual y luego repentina, como le sucedió a Hemingway”, dijo Peter Mulrean, quien fungió como embajador de Estados Unidos en Haití y ahora reside en Francia. “Hemos visto la degradación continua de la verdad, los valores y las instituciones. El mundo ha sido testigo”.Como el historiador británico Simon Schama ha hecho notar: “Cuando la verdad perece, también lo hace la verdad”. Trump, para quien la verdad no existía, deja un escenario político en el que la libertad se ha debilitado. Una Rusia envalentonada y una China asertiva están más posicionadas que nunca para mofarse de la democracia e impulsar sus agendas hostiles con el liberalismo.La política de Trump para China fue tan incoherente que Xi Jinping, el gobernante chino, acabó por recurrir a Starbucks, que tiene miles de establecimientos en China, para mejorar las tensas relaciones entre Estados Unidos y China. La semana pasada, Xi le escribió al ex director ejecutivo de la empresa, Howard Schultz, para “alentarlo” a ayudar con “el desarrollo de relaciones bilaterales”, según informó la Agencia de Noticias Xinhua.El presidente Xi Jinping de China espera a Trump antes de una reunión bilateral en Japón, en 2019.Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesSin duda, Xi siente algún aturdimiento respecto a Trump. El expresidente estadounidense lo llamó una vez simplemente “genial”, antes de cambiar de opinión. China, después de negociar una tregua en la guerra comercial de los países hace un año, fue objeto de un feroz ataque por parte del gobierno de Trump por permitir el virus a través de su negligencia inicial y por su represión en Hong Kong. El gobierno también acusó a China de cometer genocidio en su represión de los uigures y otras minorías musulmanas en la región china de Xinjiang..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-c7gg1r{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:0.875rem;margin-bottom:15px;color:#121212 !important;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-c7gg1r{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-rqynmc{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc strong{font-weight:600;}.css-rqynmc em{font-style:italic;}.css-yoay6m{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-yoay6m{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-1amoy78{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1amoy78{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-1amoy78:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-k9atqk{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-k9atqk strong{font-weight:700;}.css-k9atqk em{font-style:italic;}.css-k9atqk a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ccd9e3;}.css-k9atqk a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ddd;}.css-k9atqk a:hover{border-bottom:none;}Capitol Riot FalloutFrom Riot to ImpeachmentThe riot inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Jan. 6, followed a rally at which President Trump made an inflammatory speech to his supporters, questioning the results of the election. Here’s a look at what happened and the ongoing fallout:As this video shows, poor planning and a restive crowd encouraged by President Trump set the stage for the riot.A two hour period was crucial to turning the rally into the riot.Several Trump administration officials, including cabinet members Betsy DeVos and Elaine Chao, announced that they were stepping down as a result of the riot.Federal prosecutors have charged more than 70 people, including some who appeared in viral photos and videos of the riot. Officials expect to eventually charge hundreds of others.The House voted to impeach the president on charges of “inciting an insurrection” that led to the rampage by his supporters.La estrategia de Trump fue errática, pero sus críticas fueron congruentes. China, con su Estado de vigilancia, quiere superar a Estados Unidos como la gran potencia mundial para mediados de siglo, lo cual supondrá tal vez el mayor reto para el gobierno de Biden. Biden pretende encabezar a todas las democracias del mundo para enfrentar a China. Sin embargo, el legado de Trump es la reticencia de los aliados a alinearse con un Estados Unidos cuya palabra ahora vale menos. Parece inevitable que la Unión Europea, India y Japón tengan sus propias políticas sobre China.Incluso en los casos en los que Trump impulsó la paz en Oriente Medio, como entre Israel y algunos estados árabes, también avivó las tensiones con Irán. Biden ha sugerido que el presidente Abdel Fattah el-Sisi de Egipto era el “dictador favorito” de Trump. Pero entonces Estados Unidos ya no es la democracia favorita del mundo.“Aunque diga que Sisi no da libertad, ¿en qué lugar del mundo hay libertad total?”, dijo Ayman Fahri, de 24 años, un estudiante tunecino en El Cairo. Dijo que preferiría el reconocido autoritarismo efectivo de el-Sisi a la turbulenta democracia incipiente de Túnez. “Mira a Trump y lo que hizo”.Trump llamó al primer ministro canadiense, Justin Trudeau, “deshonesto y débil”, mientras que el brutal Kim de Corea del Norte le pareció “simpático”. No le veía el sentido a la OTAN, pero se cuadró ante un general norcoreano.Trump y el líder norcoreano, Kim Jong-un, en la Zona Desmilitarizada entre Corea del Norte y Corea del Sur en 2019. Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesAbandonó del Acuerdo de París sobre el cambio climático y el acuerdo nuclear de Irán y planeó sacar a Estados Unidos de la Organización Mundial de la Salud. Puso de cabeza el orden de la posguerra liderado por Estados Unidos. Incluso si el gobierno de Biden se mueve rápido para revertir algunas de estas decisiones, como lo hará, la confianza tardará años en restaurarse.Ischinger dijo: “Nuestra relación no volverá a ser como era antes de Trump”.Dmitry Medvedev, el expresidente de Rusia y ahora subdirector del Consejo de Seguridad del Kremlin de Putin, describió a Estados Unidos como un país sumido “en una guerra fría civil” que lo hace incapaz de ser un socio predecible. En un ensayo, concluyó que: “En los próximos años, es probable que nuestra relación siga siendo en extremo fría”.Sin embargo, la relación de Estados Unidos con Rusia, al igual que otras relaciones internacionales críticas, cambiará bajo el mandato de Biden, quien tiene profundas convicciones sobre el papel internacional crucial de Estados Unidos en la defensa y la expansión de la libertad.Biden ha descrito a Putin como un “matón de la KGB”. Se ha comprometido a pedir cuentas a Rusia del ataque con agente nervioso perpetrado en agosto contra el líder de la oposición Aleksei A. Navalny, un incidente ignorado por Trump en consonancia con su aceptación acrítica a Putin. Navalny fue detenido esta semana a su regreso a Rusia, una medida condenada en un tuit por Jake Sullivan, el nuevo asesor de seguridad nacional.Trump y el presidente Vladimir Putin de Rusia en la cumbre del G20 en Japón en 2019.Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesPutin esperó más de un mes para felicitar a Biden por su victoria. También tomó un tiempo, pero los puestos de recuerdos en Ismailovo, un extenso mercado al aire libre en Moscú, ahora venden muñecos de madera de Biden, al estilo de las matrioskas, y ya no tienen muñecos de Trump. “Ya nadie lo quiere”, dijo un vendedor. “Está acabado”.El mundo, al igual que Estados Unidos, quedó traumatizado por los años de Trump. Todo el alambre de púas en Washington y los miles de soldados de la Guardia Nacional desplegados para asegurar una transferencia pacífica del poder en Estados Unidos de América son testimonio de ello.No obstante, la Constitución prevaleció. Las maltratadas instituciones prevalecieron. Estados Unidos prevaleció cuando se desplegó al Ejército de manera similar para proteger las capitales de los estados durante el movimiento por los derechos civiles en la década de 1960. Trump está en Mar-a-Lago. Y apostar en contra de la capacidad de Estados Unidos para reinventarse y resurgir nunca fue una buena idea, ni siquiera en los peores momentos.Vivian Yee More

    • 75 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Bequeaths Biden an Upended World

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutLatest UpdatesInside the SiegeVisual TimelineNotable ArrestsCapitol Police in CrisisAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyNews AnalysisTrump Bequeaths Biden an Upended WorldThe sheen is off America. But betting against the country’s capacity for reinvention was never a good idea.President Trump with other G7 leaders in Canada in 2018. His “America First” positions galvanized other nations to put themselves first, too.Credit…Jesco Denzel/German Government, via Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesJan. 19, 2021Updated 1:34 p.m. ETPARIS — Most countries lost patience long ago. The erratic outbursts of President Trump were unacceptable to allies when they were not simply insulting. Even rivals like China and Russia reeled at the president’s gut-driven policy lurches. Mr. Trump said in 2016 that America must be “more unpredictable.” He was true to his word.The sudden infatuation with North Korea’s Stalinist leader, Kim Jong-un, the kowtowing to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, the “Chinese virus” obsession, the enthusiasm for the fracturing of the European Union, and the apparent abandonment of core American democratic values were so shocking that Mr. Trump’s departure on Wednesday from the White House is widely viewed with relief.The sheen is off America, its democratic ideals hollowed. Mr. Trump’s imprint on the world will linger. While passionate denunciations are widespread, there is a legacy of Trumpism that in some circles won’t easily fade. Through his “America First” obsession, he galvanized other nations to put themselves first, too. They will not soon fall back into line behind the United States. The domestic fracture that Mr. Trump sharpened will endure, undermining the projection of American power.“Mr. Trump is a criminal, a political pyromaniac who should be sent to criminal court,” Jean Asselborn, Luxembourg’s foreign minister, said in a radio interview. “He’s a person who was elected democratically but who is not interested in democracy in the slightest.”Such language about an American president from a European ally would have been unthinkable before Mr. Trump made outrage the leitmotif of his presidency, along with an assault on truth. His denial of a fact — a defeat in the November election — was seen by leaders including Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany, as the spark to the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol by Trump supporters.A mob amok in the inner sanctum of American democracy looked to many countries like Rome sacked by the Visigoths. America, to foreign observers, has fallen. Mr. Trump’s reckless disruption, in the midst of a pandemic, has bequeathed to Joseph R. Biden Jr., the incoming president, a great global uncertainty.Trump supporters at the U.S. Capitol earlier this month. The scenes shocked observers worldwide.Credit…Jason Andrew for The New York Times“The post-Cold War era has come to an end after 30 years, and a more complex and challenging era is unfolding: a world in danger!” said Wolfgang Ischinger, the chairman of the Munich Security Conference.Mr. Trump’s talent for gratuitous insults was felt the world over. In Mbour, a coastal town in Senegal, Rokhaya Dabo, a school administrator, said, “I don’t speak English, but I was offended when he said Africa is a shithole.” In Rome, Piera Marini, who makes hats for her store on Via Giulia, said she was delighted Mr. Trump was going: “Just the way he treated women was chilling.”“Biden needs to tackle the restoration of democracy at home in a humble way that allows Europeans to say we have similar problems, so let’s get out of this together,” Nathalie Tocci, an Italian political scientist, said in an interview. “With Trump, we Europeans were suddenly the enemy.”Still, to the last, Mr. Trump’s nationalism had its backers. They ranged from the majority of Israelis, who liked his unconditional support, to aspiring autocrats from Hungary to Brazil who saw in him the charismatic leader of a counterrevolution against liberal democracy.Mr. Trump was the preferred candidate of 70 percent of Israelis before the November election, according to a poll by the Israel Democracy Institute. “Israelis are apprehensive about what lies beyond the Trump administration,” said Shalom Lipner, who long served in the prime minister’s office. They have their reasons. Mr. Trump was dismissive of the Palestinian cause. He helped Israel normalize relations with several Arab states.Mr. Trump was the preferred candidate of 70 percent of Israelis before the November election.Credit…Ariel Schalit/Associated PressElsewhere the support for Mr. Trump was ideological. He was the symbol of a great nationalist and autocratic lurch. He personified a revolt against Western democracies, portrayed as the place where family, church, nation and traditional notions of marriage and gender go to die. He resisted mass migration, diversity and the erosion of white male dominance.One of Trump’s boosters, the nationalist Brazilian president, Jair Bolsonaro, claimed this month that in the American election, “There were people who voted three, four times, dead people voted.” In an illustration of Mr. Trump’s role as an enabler of autocrats, Mr. Bolsonaro went on to question the integrity of Brazil’s voting system.Viktor Orban, Hungary’s anti-immigrant prime minister and a strong Trump supporter, told Reuters last year that the Democrats had forced “moral imperialism” on the world. Although he congratulated Mr. Biden on his victory, Mr. Orban’s relations with the new president are certain to be strained.This global cultural battle will continue because the conditions of its eruption — insecurity, disappearing jobs, resentment in societies made still more unequal by the impact of Covid-19 — persist from France to Latin America. The Trump phenomenon also persists. His tens of millions of supporters are not about to vanish.“Were the events at the Capitol the apotheosis and tragic endpoint of Trump’s four years, or was it the founding act of a new American political violence spurred by a dangerous energy?” François Delattre, the secretary-general of the French Foreign Ministry, asked. “We do not know, and in countries with similar crises of their democratic models we must worry.”France is one such country of increasingly tribal confrontation. If the U.S. Justice Department could be politicized, if the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could be eviscerated, and if 147 elected Members of Congress could vote to overturn the election results even after the Capitol was stormed, there is reason to believe that in other fractured post-truth societies anything could happen.“How did we get here? Gradually and then suddenly, as Hemingway had it,” said Peter Mulrean, a former United States ambassador to Haiti now living in France. “We’ve seen the steady degradation of truth, values and institutions. The world has watched.”As Simon Schama, the British historian, has observed, “When truth perishes so does freedom.” Mr. Trump, for whom truth did not exist, leaves a political stage where liberty is weakened. An emboldened Russia and an assertive China are more strongly placed than ever to mock democracy and push agendas hostile to liberalism.Toward China, Mr. Trump’s policy was so incoherent that Xi Jinping, the Chinese leader, was left appealing to Starbucks, which has thousands of stores in China, to improve strained U.S.-China relations. Mr. Xi wrote last week to the company’s former chief executive, Howard Schultz, to “encourage him” to help with “the development of bilateral relations,” the official Xinhua news agency reported.President Xi Jinping of China waiting for Mr. Trump before a bilateral meeting in Japan in 2019. Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesMr. Xi no doubt feels some Trump whiplash. The president once called him just “great,” before changing his mind. China, after negotiating a truce in the countries’ trade war a year ago, came under fierce attack by the Trump administration for enabling the virus through its initial neglect and for its crackdown in Hong Kong. The administration also accused the Chinese government of committing genocide in its repression of Uighurs and other Muslim minorities in the Xinjiang region of China.Mr. Trump’s approach was erratic but his criticism coherent. China, with its surveillance state, wants to overtake America as the world’s great power by midcentury, presenting the Biden administration with perhaps its greatest challenge. Mr. Biden aims to harness all the world’s democracies to confront China. But Mr. Trump’s legacy is reluctance among allies to line up behind a United States whose word is now worth less. It seems inevitable that the European Union, India and Japan will all have their own China policies..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-c7gg1r{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:0.875rem;margin-bottom:15px;color:#121212 !important;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-c7gg1r{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-rqynmc{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc strong{font-weight:600;}.css-rqynmc em{font-style:italic;}.css-yoay6m{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-yoay6m{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-1cs27wo{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1cs27wo{padding:20px;}}.css-1cs27wo:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}.css-1cs27wo[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-1cs27wo[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-1cs27wo[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-1cs27wo[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-k9atqk{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-k9atqk strong{font-weight:700;}.css-k9atqk em{font-style:italic;}.css-k9atqk a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ccd9e3;}.css-k9atqk a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ddd;}.css-k9atqk a:hover{border-bottom:none;}Capitol Riot FalloutFrom Riot to ImpeachmentThe riot inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Jan. 6, followed a rally at which President Trump made an inflammatory speech to his supporters, questioning the results of the election. Here’s a look at what happened and the ongoing fallout:As this video shows, poor planning and a restive crowd encouraged by President Trump set the stage for the riot.A two hour period was crucial to turning the rally into the riot.Several Trump administration officials, including cabinet members Betsy DeVos and Elaine Chao, announced that they were stepping down as a result of the riot.Federal prosecutors have charged more than 70 people, including some who appeared in viral photos and videos of the riot. Officials expect to eventually charge hundreds of others.The House voted to impeach the president on charges of “inciting an insurrection” that led to the rampage by his supporters.Even where Mr. Trump advanced peace in the Middle East, as between Israel and some Arab states, he also stoked tensions with Iran. Mr. Biden has suggested that President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt was Mr. Trump’s “favorite dictator.” But then America is no longer the world’s favorite democracy.“Even if you say Sisi doesn’t give freedom, where in the world is there total freedom?” said Ayman Fahri, 24, a Tunisian student in Cairo. He said he would take Mr. el-Sisi’s brand of effective authoritarianism over Tunisia’s turbulent fledgling democracy. “Look at Trump and what he did.”Mr. Trump called the Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, “dishonest and weak,” whereas North Korea’s brutal Mr. Kim was “funny.” He did not see the point of NATO but saluted a North Korean general.Mr. Trump and North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, at the Demilitarized Zone between North and South Korea in 2019. Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesHe exited the Paris Agreement on climate change and the Iran nuclear agreement, and planned to leave the World Health Organization. He stood the postwar American-led order on its head. Even if the Biden administration moves fast to reverse some of these decisions, as it will, trust will take years to restore.Mr. Ischinger said: “We will not be returning to the pre-Trump relationship.”Dmitri Medvedev, the former president of Russia and now deputy head of Mr. Putin’s Kremlin Security Council, described America as mired “in a cold civil war” that makes it incapable of being a predictable partner. In an essay, he concluded that, “In the coming years, our relationship is likely to remain extremely cold.”But the U.S. relationship with Russia, like other critical international relationships, will change under Mr. Biden, who has deep convictions about America’s critical international role in defending and extending freedom.Mr. Biden has described Mr. Putin as a “K.G.B. thug.” He has pledged to hold Russia accountable for the August nerve-agent attack on the opposition leader Aleksei A. Navalny — an incident ignored by Mr. Trump in line with his uncritical embrace of Mr. Putin. Mr. Navalny was arrested this week on his return to Russia, a move condemned in a tweet by Jake Sullivan, the incoming national security adviser.Mr. Trump and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia at the G20 summit in Japan in 2019. Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesMr. Putin waited more than a month to congratulate Mr. Biden on his victory. It also took a while, but souvenir stalls at Ismailovo, a sprawling outdoor market in Moscow, now stock wooden nesting dolls featuring Mr. Biden and have dropped Trump dolls. “Nobody wants him anymore,” said a man selling dolls. “He is finished.”The world, like America, was traumatized by the Trump years. All the razor wire in Washington and the thousands of National Guard troops deployed to make sure a peaceful transfer of power takes place in the United States of America are testimony to that.But the Constitution held. Battered institutions held. America held when troops were similarly deployed to protect state capitols during the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Mr. Trump is headed to Mar-a-Lago. And betting against America’s capacity for reinvention and revival was never a good idea, even at the worst of times.Reporting was contributed by More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Nepal's Prime Minister, K.P. Sharma Oli, Calls for New Elections

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Coronavirus OutbreakliveLatest UpdatesMaps and CasesThe Latest Vaccine InformationU.S. Deaths Surpass 300,000F.A.Q.AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyNepal Falls Into Political Turmoil. China and India Are Watching.The prime minister dissolved the lower house of Parliament, throwing into doubt the political fortunes of the Himalayan country, which has long swung between Beijing and New Delhi.By dissolving Parliament, Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli of Nepal might avoid a potential no-confidence vote. His rivals called the move unconstitutional.Credit…Prakash Mathema/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesDec. 20, 2020Updated 9:57 a.m. ETKATHMANDU, Nepal — Nepal’s top leader dissolved Parliament on Sunday amid infighting among members of the governing party, throwing into doubt the political future of a strategically important Himalayan country where China and India have long jockeyed for influence.The prime minister, K.P. Sharma Oli, called for the dissolution of the lower house of Parliament despite protests from his own Nepal Communist Party and opposition groups, including the largest, Nepali Congress. Nepal is now set to hold elections starting in late April, more than a year earlier than the expected vote in November 2022.Mr. Oli made his move in the face of rising dissatisfaction with his job performance even within the ranks of his own party. He was elected to a second stint as prime minister in 2017 on promises of tamping down corruption and forging stronger ties with China and its economic growth machine.But Mr. Oli’s administration has been plagued with its own corruption allegations as well as criticism of his government’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, which has devastated an economy that has long depended on tourism and on remittances from its citizens abroad. Divisions also lingered within his party, which was created by the alliance of two smaller communist parties in 2017.By dissolving the lower house of Parliament, Mr. Oli might avoid a potential no-confidence vote from lawmakers. But experts said that he lacked the power to dissolve Parliament and that the move could be challenged in Nepal’s highest court.“Under existing constitutional provisions dissolution of Parliament can’t be the prime minister’s prerogative when there are many other options to form a new government,” said Bipin Adhikari, former dean of Kathmandu University Law School and a constitutional expert. “It’s an unconstitutional step.”The political turbulence in Nepal is taking place amid rising tensions between China and India, its two powerful and increasingly bellicose neighbors. Their rivalry has intensified as China has made increasingly forceful claims toward disputed land along their rugged border in the Himalayas.Xi Jinping, China’s top leader, with Bidya Devi Bhandari, Nepal’s president, in Kathmandu last year. The visit was a sign of the Himalayan country’s strategic importance to Beijing.Credit…Pool photo by Bikash KarkiThose tensions came to a boil in June, when unarmed troops from both countries clashed in violence that killed 20 Indian soldiers and an undisclosed number on the Chinese side. Though the two sides have pledged to ease tensions, the rivalry could provide an opportunity for the United States to build stronger ties with India once Joseph R. Biden assumes the presidency, possibly giving it a greater role in American efforts to check China’s moves to increase its sway in the region.Nepal has long swung between favoring one country or the other. It has extensive economic ties with India, where many of its people work, and like India has a majority Hindu population. But relations have soured in recent years.The Coronavirus Outbreak More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The World Is Full of Challenges. Here’s How Biden Can Meet Them.

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyThe World Is Full of Challenges. Here’s How Biden Can Meet Them.The incoming administration needs to update American policy to meet the challenges of the 21st century.Mr. Gates served as secretary of defense for Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama from 2006 to 2011.Dec. 18, 2020, 5:00 a.m. ETCredit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesPresident-elect Joe Biden appears to be framing his foreign policy around three themes: re-engaging with America’s friends and allies, renewing our participation in international organizations and relying more heavily on nonmilitary instruments of power. Considering the challenges posed by China and other countries, as well as transnational threats that range from pandemics to climate change, these are, in my view, the correct priorities. (Though, of course, unparalleled military power must remain the backdrop for America’s relations with the world.)In each case, however, a return to the pre-Trump status quo will be inadequate to the task. In each, it is necessary to reform, revitalize and restructure the American approach.Our NATO allies, as well as Japan, South Korea and others, will welcome America’s reaffirmation of its security commitments and its switch to respectful dialogue after the confrontational Trump years. But the new administration ought to insist on our allies doing more on several fronts. President Trump’s pressure on them to spend more on defense was a continuation of a theme across multiple presidencies. That pressure must continue.But it’s not just on military spending that the new administration needs to take a tough stand with allies. Germany must be held to account not just for its pathetic level of military spending, but also for trading the economic and security interests of Poland and Ukraine for the economic benefits of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline running from Russia to Germany.Turkey’s purchase of the Russian S-400 air defense system against repeated American warnings must have costs. (Recently imposed sanctions are a good start.) And Ankara must also be held to account for its actions in Libya, the eastern Mediterranean and Syria that contravene the interests of other NATO allies and complicate efforts to achieve peace. Actions by member states contrary to the interests of other allies ought not be ignored.The United States needs to take the lead in NATO, an “alliance of democracies,” to devise consequences for member states — such as Turkey, Hungary and, increasingly, Poland — that move toward (or have fully embraced) authoritarianism. There is no provision in the NATO Charter for removing a member state, but creative diplomacy is possible, including suspension or other punitive steps.Mr. Biden’s embrace of the international organizations that Mr. Trump has spurned must be accompanied by an agenda for their improvement. Despite their many problems, these organizations serve useful purposes and can be effective conduits for American influence around the world.In the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet Union had an elaborate, long-range strategy for seeding its officials throughout the United Nations and associated institutions. China seems to be pursuing a similar strategy today. When we walk away from the World Health Organization and other such organizations, we provide the Chinese with opportunities to dominate them and use them for their own purposes.The new administration must insist on the far-reaching organizational reform of international organizations (such as the W.H.O.), using all the diplomatic and economic leverage we can muster to make effective reform actually happen. Simply showing up again is not good enough.Closer to home, as the new administration commits to far greater reliance on nonmilitary tools like conventional diplomacy, development assistance and public diplomacy to protect America’s interests and advance our objectives, it needs to recognize that those tools overall are in serious need of investment and updating. Our national security apparatus — designed in 1947 — needs to be restructured for the 21st century.The multidimensional competition with China and transnational challenges require the formal involvement of agencies previously not considered part of the national security apparatus and new approaches to achieving true “whole of government” American strategies and operations.The State Department, our principal nondefense instrument of power, is in dire need of reform, as many senior active and retired foreign service officers attest. In return for meaningful structural and cultural change, the State Department should get the significant additional resources it needs.In recent years, our international economic tools have centered mainly on punitive measures, such as sanctions and tariffs. We need to be more creative in finding positive economic inducements to persuade other countries to act — or not act — in accordance with our interests. No other country comes even close to the United States in providing humanitarian assistance after disasters, but nearly all other major assistance successes in recent years — such as George W. Bush’s President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief or the creation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation — were put in place outside the normal bureaucratic structure or processes.While the United States cannot compete directly with China’s Belt and Road projects and development assistance, we should look for ways to leverage the power of our private sector. American corporations can partner with the United States government in countries around the world that offer both sound investment prospects and opportunities to advance American interests. The creation in 2018 of the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation was a good start. President Barack Obama’s 2013 “Power Africa” initiative, which was passed unanimously by both houses of Congress and aimed to bring universal electricity access to sub-Saharan Africa, is an example of successful partnering between the private sector and the government.Finally, America’s strategic communications — our ability to spread our message and influence governments and peoples — are pitifully inadequate and outdated.In the early 2000s, President Hu Jintao of China committed some $7 billion to vastly expand China’s international media and influence capabilities. By way of contrast, in 1998, Congress abolished the U.S. Information Agency; subsequently, “public diplomacy” was tucked into a corner of the State Department in an organization that today doesn’t even report directly to the secretary of state.There is no coordination of messaging across the government, and efforts to make better use of social media and other new technologies have been laggard and disjointed. Surely, the country that invented marketing, public relations and the internet can figure out how to recapture primacy in strategic communications.Misgivings linger abroad about whether American re-engagement (and reliability) will last beyond this new administration — and about the new president’s views on the use of military power. That said, there is considerable relief among most of our allies and friends that Mr. Biden has won the election.This provides the new president with considerable leverage to revitalize and strengthen alliances and international institutions and to show at home that doing so advances American interests around the world and the well-being of our own citizens. This would be an enduring legacy for the Biden administration.Robert M. Gates served as Secretary of Defense for Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama from 2006 to 2011.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares179 Views

      in World Politics

      Is Realism in Foreign Policy Realistic?

      by

      The year 2020 has understandably been a time of deep confusion in the world of diplomacy, marked by the parallel phenomena of a Donald Trump presidency that may come to an end in January 2021 and the ongoing global curse of COVID-19. Those factors and other more local ones — such as yet another countdown for Brexit — have brought to a virtual standstill serious consideration of how the most powerful nations of the world will be conducting their foreign policy in the years to come. 

      With the increasing likelihood of a Joe Biden presidency and a hoped-for fadeout of COVID-19, it may be time to begin looking at the prospects some influential thinkers in the realm of international relations have been putting forward.

      The New York Times Under the Influence

      READ MORE

      Last year, in those halcyon days when COVID-19 was still hiding in the recesses of a bat cave on the outskirts of human society and President Trump — who was headed for another four years in the White House — was gloating over unemployment levels in the US that had reached a record low, celebrated political scientist John Mearsheimer took a trip “down under” to teach Australians his doctrine of “offensive realism.”

      The University of Chicago professor informed them that the rise of China would lead to a military standoff with the reigning hegemon, the US. Though Australia may appear in geographic terms to be an appendage of Asia, with strong economic ties, Mearsheimer insisted that Australians should see their role as an outpost of the American continent, which he occasionally referred to as Godzilla.

      In a 2019 debate with Australian strategic thinker Hugh White, Mearsheimer reduced his lesson to the Aussies to its simplest terms: “If you go with China, you want to understand you are our enemy. You are then deciding to become an enemy of the United States. Because again, we’re talking about an intense security competition. You’re either with us or against us.”

      Does this sound like the language of war? Mearsheimer wants us to believe it’s something else. Not even a cold war. Even less, a global chess game. Those obsolete metaphors should be put to pasture. It has a new name: “intense security competition.”

      Here is today’s 3D definition:

      Security competition:

      A contest concerning political reputation and global power that requires little more than demonstrating the capacity and readiness to launch a nuclear war, now seen as the principal attribute of any nation claiming to assume the responsibility for writing a rulebook that the rest of humanity will be obliged to follow

      Contextual Note

      This definition sums up Mearsheimer’s ideology. Breaking with the idealistic tradition in US diplomacy that justifies aggression and imperial conquest by citing its commitment to establishing or defending liberal democratic values in other parts of the world, Mearsheimer prefers to recognize reality for what it is (or what he thinks it is). Some may be tempted to call this political Darwinism, inspired by Herbert Spencer’s 19th-century social Darwinism.

      Lecturing the Australians, Mearsheimer makes no bones about the brutally expansionist history of the growth of the US empire that began in 1783. He sees it as a consistent, continuous development. Referring to the culture of his childhood neighborhood in New York, he calls it the political equivalent of becoming “the biggest and baddest dude on the block.” As a social scientist, he gives it another more technical name: regional hegemon.

      Mearsheimer insists that Australia must ally with the US instead of China, not because it is less authoritarian, but mainly because the US is bigger and badder. China is too far behind to catch up in the near future. And for a realist, the name of the game is simply “follow the leader.” And though Australia’s economy is closely tied to China’s, Mearsheimer warns the Aussies that if they don’t ally with the US, they will likely receive the same treatment as Fidel Castro’s Cuba (embargos, blockades, sanctions and perhaps even assassination attempts on a future leader).

      Appearing to address the question of the choices Australians must make on their own, Mearsheimer nevertheless claims to know what Australia’s future will inevitably look like. “Security is more important than prosperity because if you don’t survive, you’re not going to prosper,” he says. “That’s why you’ll be with us.”

      His Aussie audience at the conference may or may not see a resemblance between this and the mafioso telling a local shopkeeper, who resists paying protection, to be careful because “things break.” But at least one Australian commentator, Caitlin Johnstone, has understood his message. She provocatively offered what may be the best and most logical translation of Mearsheimer’s point by turning it on its head. “Australia is not aligned with the U.S. to protect itself from China. Australia is aligned with the U.S. to protect itself from the U.S.,” she writes.

      Mearsheimer was even more blunt in his lecture on the same tour: “You understand that the United States is the ruthless great power.”

      Historical Note

      In a lengthy academic article, “Bound to Fail, The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order,” John Mearsheimer situates his theory within the perspective of post-World War II history. Contradicting the standard account of the Cold War, he offers this correction: “The Cold War order, which is sometimes mistakenly referred to as a ‘liberal international order,’ was neither liberal nor international.” He claims that its idealism was a sham. It was realistic. It was about hegemonic power.

      Instead, he asserts that what followed the collapse of the Soviet Union should be called the rise of the liberal international order. And he explains that “the post–Cold War liberal international order was doomed to collapse, because the key policies on which it rested are deeply flawed. Spreading liberal democracy around the globe … is extremely difficult” and it “often poisons relations with other countries and sometimes leads to disastrous wars.”

      Having given precise instruction to the Australians, Mearsheimer now addresses his compatriots with the question: “How should the United States act as it leaves behind the liberal international order that it worked so assiduously to build?” His answer is that the US must abandon the goal of forcefully spreading democracy and “engaging in social engineering abroad.” 

      He wants the US to consolidate its power through a conjoined focus on economic control and military might. He acknowledges that China is positioned to become a regional hegemon in Asia. But he reminds us that “the United States does not tolerate peer competitors. The idea that China is going to become a regional hegemon is unacceptable to the United States.”

      Embed from Getty Images

      Some may find this contradictory. Mearsheimer explains to the Australians that the only legitimate hegemony is regional and not global and then claims that the US — the dominant regional hegemon in the Americas — should not allow another regional hegemon to exist. That surely means that by default the US becomes the global hegemon. 

      Mearsheimer confirms this impression when he describes the merits of a “rules-based order,” which so many commentators believe Donald Trump has compromised. This is what Mearsheimer told the Australians: “The United States writes the rules. We obey them when it suits us and we disobey them when it doesn’t suit us.” 

      He then adds this remark: “Those rules are written to benefit the great powers so that they can wage security competition … and if they don’t like the rules they just disobey them.” His choice of the verb “wage” clearly demonstrates that his idea of “security competition” is nothing more than a euphemism for war. That apparently is how realists have been thinking ever since Thomas Hobbes.

      So, what about the coming US presidential election? Stephen Walt, who famously collaborated with Mearsheimer to expose the influence of the Israel lobby on US politics, has titled his recent article in Foreign Policy: “Biden Needs to Play the Nationalism Card Right Now.” Walt cites Mearsheimer’s insistence that “nationalism remains the most powerful political ideology on the planet and a critical source of identity for most human beings, including the vast majority of Americans.”

      In an interview, Mearsheimer recently articulated his expectations of a new Democratic administration: “I think that will all be for the good.” In other words, he sees Trump’s “America First” nationalism (which he appreciates) being replaced by Biden’s more realistic brand of hegemonic nationalism, which he also appreciates. Australians will simply have to learn to live with it.

      *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More