Legislatures and Parliaments

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Scotland’s Independence Movement Is Down, but Not Out, Analysts Say

      by

      Support for Scottish independence has dipped, but backing for Scotland remaining part of the United Kingdom is fragile, too. Nicola Sturgeon’s arrest leaves the fate of the movement in flux.For almost a decade Nicola Sturgeon, as the leader of the Scottish government, was the uncontested figurehead of the push to break Scotland’s centuries-old union with England.Her resignation earlier this year — and now her arrest on Sunday over an investigation into her Scottish National Party’s finances — leaves the fate of the movement in flux.Support for independence has dipped, but backing for Scotland remaining part of the United Kingdom, a bond forged in 1707, is fragile, too. Opinion polls show the Scottish public still roughly split on the issue. For now, the political path to an independent Scotland is blocked.“It’s a stalemate, there is no settled will for independence, but equally we have to acknowledge that there is no settled will for union either,” said Nicola McEwen, professor of territorial politics at the University of Edinburgh.“Reports of the demise of the independence movement and indeed of the S.N.P. are somewhat exaggerated,” said Professor McEwen, who added that “given everything that’s going on, maybe it’s surprising that support hasn’t declined more than it has.”Operation Branchform, the code name for inquiry into the Scottish National Party’s finances, began in 2021 and was reported to have followed complaints about the handling of about 600,000 pounds, or about $750,000, in donations raised to campaign for a second vote on Scottish independence. In 2014, Scots voted by 55 to 45 percent against breaking away from the United Kingdom in a divisive referendum.Ms. Sturgeon, who was released on Sunday after seven hours of questioning and who swiftly proclaimed her innocence, has not been charged. On Monday, her successor, Humza Yousaf, rejected calls for Ms. Sturgeon to be suspended from the party.She is the third senior figure in the party to be arrested but not charged. Another is Ms. Sturgeon’s husband, Peter Murrell, the party’s former chief executive who held the post from 1999 until March, when he resigned after accepting blame for misleading statements from the party about the size of its dues-paying membership.Police officers outside the home of Ms. Sturgeon and her husband, Peter Murrell, in Uddingston, Scotland, in April.Andrew Milligan/Press Association, via Associated PressThe police investigation deepened in the weeks after Ms. Sturgeon’s surprise resignation and the fractious competition to succeed her that was won, narrowly, by Mr. Yousaf.His leadership is still relatively new but, so far, he has struggled to match the high profile of his predecessor, or to advance toward the prize that ultimately eluded her: Scottish independence.Supporters have pressed for a second vote on Scottish independence after the first one failed in 2014. Their argument was bolstered by Brexit, which took Britain out of the European Union because the majority of Scots who voted in the Brexit referendum of 2016 wanted to remain in the European bloc. They were outnumbered by voters in England and Wales who wanted to leave.But, to have legal force, the government in London must agree to another vote on independence, and successive prime ministers have refused, insisting that the decision of 2014 stands for a generation.Ms. Sturgeon hit another roadblock last year when she tested in court her right to schedule a referendum without approval from London. In November, Britain’s Supreme Court ruled against her.Some hard-line voices favor unilateral action, perhaps holding a vote in defiance of London. Catalan separatists in Spain took that route in 2017, but it led to the imprisonment or exile of some independence movement leaders. And going outside the law would block an independent Scotland’s path toward membership of the European Union, the S.N.P.’s objective.Frustrated on all sides, Ms. Sturgeon finally proposed using the next British general election, which is expected in the second half 2024, as a de facto independence referendum, making Scotland’s constitutional future the central question. Internal critics doubted the practicality of that idea, given that other political parties would not agree.Nicola Sturgeon at a news conference in 2022 about Scottish independence.Andrew Milligan/Press Association, via Associated PressIn an interview broadcast on Sunday, before Ms. Sturgeon’s arrest, Mr. Yousaf said he was confident that, even with recent setbacks, an independent Scotland was coming.“Despite having some of the most difficult weeks our party has probably faced, certainly in the modern era, that support for independence is still rock solid. It’s a good base for us to build on,” he told the BBC. “I’ve got no doubt at all, that I will be the leader that will ensure that Scotland becomes an independent nation.”The party might have missed its moment, however. It is hard to see a more favorable backdrop for the independence campaign than the messy aftermath of Brexit, the chaotic leadership of the former prime minister, Boris Johnson — who was unpopular in Scotland — and the political dramas of 2022 when Britain changed prime ministers twice.Paradoxically, while Brexit may have strengthened the political case for Scottish independence, it has complicated the practical one. Britain has left the European Union’s giant single market and customs union, and that implies that there would be a trade border between an independent Scotland and England, its biggest economic partner.The years of gridlock and chaos that followed the Brexit referendum may also have scared some Scottish voters away from further constitutional changes.In addition, the S.N.P. has been criticized over its record in government, and the opposition Labour Party senses an opportunity to recover in Scotland, where it dominated politically before the S.N.P. decimated it.“Coming after dishonest claims of party membership, a very poor record in government and making no progress on independence this simply adds to the S.N.P.’s woes,” said James Mitchell, a professor of public policy at Edinburgh University, referring to recent events.“It would be damaging enough to the S.N.P.’s electoral prospects but with Labour looking ever more confident and competent in Scotland as well across Britain, it looks as if the S.N.P.’s opportunity to advance its cause has passed.”Humza Yousaf, Scotland’s new first minister, has said he was confident that, despite recent setbacks, an independent Scotland was coming.Russell Cheyne/ReutersThe next British general election might present Mr. Yousaf with a new opening if, as some pollsters predict, Labour emerges as the biggest party but without an overall majority. In that scenario, the S.N.P. could try to trade its support for a minority Labour government in exchange for a promise to hold a second referendum.The problem is that Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, has so far rejected any such deal. And, if some Scottish independence supporters vote for Labour to try and defeat the Conservative government, led by Rishi Sunak, the S.N.P. could lose seats at Britain’s Parliament, weakening its hand.Some analysts believe that the independence movement should concentrate on building wider popular support, including through other organizations and political parties, reaching out beyond the confines of the S.N.P. and its supporters.After all, Scotland’s union with England was entered into voluntarily, and were opinion polls to show around 60 percent of voters consistently favoring an independent Scotland, that would be difficult for a British government to ignore.Even Mr. Yousaf acknowledges that is some way off, however. At present, he told the BBC, “it’s pretty obvious that independence is not the consistent settled will of the Scottish people.”The question confronting him, his colleagues and the wider independence movement is how they intend to change that. “I don’t really see any signs of a strategy,” said Professor McEwen, “that doesn’t mean there isn’t one, I just don’t see any evidence of it.” More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Sinn Fein Surges in Local Elections, Highlighting Northern Ireland’s Divide

      by

      As the party climbs, its rivals, the Democratic Unionists, are stalled, which means any compromise that could revive its power-sharing national government may remain elusive.The Irish nationalist party, Sinn Fein, cemented its status as the largest party in Northern Ireland in local election results counted over the weekend. But rather than break a political deadlock in the North, Sinn Fein’s striking gains may harden the sectarian divide that has long complicated its fragile government.Sinn Fein, the party that has historically called for uniting the North with the Republic of Ireland, gained 39 seats, for a total of 144 council members who oversee services like fixing roads and collecting trash. The Democratic Unionists, who support remaining part of the United Kingdom, managed to hold on to their existing total of 122 seats, a mediocre result that is nevertheless viewed by some in their ranks as vindication of the party’s refusal to enter a power-sharing government since last year.The combination of a surging Sinn Fein and a stalled, but defiant, Democratic Unionist Party, or D.U.P., gives neither side much incentive to compromise in restoring Northern Ireland’s assembly, which collapsed over a year ago after the D.U.P. pulled out in a dispute over the post-Brexit trade rules that govern the territory. And British officials in London seem resigned to continued paralysis, with some predicting there won’t be any movement toward a restored government until the fall.“The picture is one of unionism and nationalism both more hard-line than ever,” said Katy Hayward, a professor of politics at Queen’s University in Belfast. “That doesn’t bode too well for the prospect of power sharing, even if it does get restarted.”The chronic political dysfunction cast a long shadow over last month’s celebration of the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement. That treaty ended decades of sectarian violence in Northern Ireland, known as the Troubles, by creating a government that balances power between the unionists, who favor remaining part of the United Kingdom, and the nationalists, who favor a united Irish Republic.But the government has been paralyzed for 15 months over the unionists’ claims that the post-Brexit trade arrangements, known at the Northern Ireland protocol, drive a wedge between the North and the rest of the United Kingdom. They called for the British government to all but overturn the protocol.A girl walking on the Catholic side of the peace line that separates the Catholic and Protestant communities in West Belfast.Andrew Testa for The New York TimesPrime Minister Rishi Sunak of Britain struck a deal with the European Union in February that modified many of the rules, and he called on the unionists to re-enter the assembly. But the Democratic Unionists have refused, arguing that the changes fall short of the root-and-branch overhaul that they had demanded.Their objection has done nothing to prevent the agreement, known as the Windsor Framework, from being implemented. But it rallied the party’s core voters, who feel increasingly isolated in Northern Ireland, where demographic trends are moving against them. The Catholic population, which tends to be nationalist, has overtaken the Protestant population, which tends to be unionist.While the Democratic Unionists treaded water in the elections, the more moderate Ulster Unionist Party lost 21 seats, a bruising setback that analysts said would discredit its less antagonistic approach to power sharing. The Democratic Unionists also fended off a challenge from the even more hard-line Traditional Unionist Voice.Similarly, the other major Irish nationalist party, the Social Democratic and Labour Party, which does not have Sinn Fein’s vestigial ties to the violent resistance of the Irish Republican Army, lost 20 seats in the election. That leaves Sinn Fein as the overwhelming force among nationalist voters.Sinn Fein first emerged as the largest party in legislative elections last year, a victory that gave it the right to name a first minister in the government, with the runner-up D.U.P. naming a deputy first minister. Sinn Fein’s inability to do that because of the Democratic Unionists’ intransigence has frustrated its voters, who analysts said flocked to the polls in large numbers in these elections to register their disapproval.“Sinn Fein did better than anyone predicted they would, even Sinn Fein,” Professor Hayward said, noting that it was the first election in which the overall nationalist vote was larger than the overall unionist vote.Jeffrey Donaldson, center, the head of the Democratic Unionist Party, in February.Charles Mcquillan/Getty ImagesUntil now, Sinn Fein has campaigned heavily on kitchen-table issues like housing and health care, eschewing a direct appeal for Irish unification. But headlines in Irish nationalist papers this week called on the British government to clarify the conditions under which a poll on Irish unification would be held.Under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement, Britain’s top official for Northern Ireland must call a referendum if there is clear evidence that people favor breaking away from the United Kingdom and becoming part of a united Ireland. But there is no precise mechanism for measuring that sentiment.The issue of unification is also likely to come up more frequently in the Republic of Ireland, where Sinn Fein comfortably outpolls either of its rivals, Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, which currently govern in a unity coalition.“They’re now really on the rise in both North and South,” said Diarmaid Ferriter, a professor of modern Irish history at University College Dublin. “They’re not big enough to govern on their own in the South, but they’re heading in that direction.” At the moment, Sinn Fein is pressing its advantage: The party’s leader in Northern Ireland, Michelle O’Neill, accepted an invitation from Buckingham Palace to attend the coronation of King Charles III, declaring on Twitter that times had changed.The unionists, on the other hand, are in a familiar cul-de-sac: opposed to the status quo, but unable to propose any viable alternatives.If they continue to spurn the government, analysts say they will continue to bleed support in the broader electorate. But if they drop their opposition, the D.U.P.’s leaders fear they will be outflanked by more hard-line unionist parties.“There’s a bit of a sense of a time warp in Northern Ireland,” Professor Ferriter said. “The D.U.P. is not going to succeed in renegotiating the deal. London is not remotely interested and has already moved on. We could be in for a long, hot and boring summer.” More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      He Promised Change in Thailand. But Will He Be Allowed to Lead?

      by

      Pita Limjaroenrat led his party to victory in the Thai election and seems poised to become the next prime minister, unless the military blocks him.When Pita Limjaroenrat was a student at Harvard in 2008, he shadowed his American classmates who were campaigning at the time for former President Barack Obama. The experience gave him a window into electoral politics, from phone banks and polling data to knocking on doors and putting campaign flags on front lawns.Fifteen years later, Mr. Pita said he used what he learned in Massachusetts to help his recent campaign in Thailand, where he stunned the country’s political establishment by leading his progressive Move Forward Party to a momentous victory.For decades, Thai voters had known only two dominant political forces: one led by conservative royalists and militarists and the other by a populist billionaire living in exile. Supporters saw Mr. Pita, 42, as the candidate who represented change and a return to democracy after nine years of military rule that was preceded by a coup. On the stump, he promised to undo the military’s grip on Thai politics and revise a law that criminalizes criticism of the monarchy.But his path to prime minister remains uncertain.Mr. Pita greeting supporters during a voter thank you parade culminating in Owl Market in Nonthaburi, on Thursday.Lauren DeCicca for The New York Times“What I need to do now is to find a road-map that bridges that gap between a functioning democracy and half-baked democracy at the very end of nine-year rule by a military coup,” he said in an interview with The New York Times.In order to take the role, Mr. Pita needs to gather enough support in the 500-member House of Representatives to overcome a 250-member, military-appointed Senate. To be precise, he needs 376 votes. So far, he only has 314.Already, several senators have said they would not support a candidate who so threatens the status quo. Now, Thais are waiting to see if their choice will be allowed to lead or if he will be blocked from becoming prime minister by prevailing powers, an outcome that could plunge the country into political chaos.Thai generals rewrote the Constitution in 2017 so a Senate stacked with military allies could jointly determine the top leader. Conservatives are counting on an Election Commission complaint that has been filed against Mr. Pita for failing to disclose that he owned shares of a now-defunct media company that he inherited from his father.So far, Mr. Pita has brushed off the petition to investigate him, saying he had already reported the shares to the authorities. He also said he believed there was a group of senators who had “felt their conscience” and understood the consequences of going against the 25 million Thais who voted for change. Only 14 senators have indicated that they would vote for him.Mr. Pita said that watching friends at Harvard campaigning for Barack Obama in 2008 helped inform his campaign this year.Lauren DeCicca for The New York TimesMr. Pita graduated with a joint degree from the Harvard Kennedy School and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’ Sloan School of Management. From his time in the United States, he learned how to map out a campaign strategy, which he put to use in this election by using data to reach voters in 160 districts.Most of Mr. Pita’s career was in consulting and business, as a managing director of the rice-bran oil business that his father started, and then as a senior executive for Grab, the ride-hailing company that acquired Uber in Southeast Asia.As a candidate, Mr. Pita developed a reputation for being a clear orator, winning the public over with his speeches and polished looks.He said he admires José Alberto “Pepe” Mujica Cordano, the former president of Uruguay, who was tortured and imprisoned during the country’s military dictatorship. He is reading “It’s OK to Be Angry About Capitalism” by Senator Bernie Sanders. Some of his favorite bands are Metallica, The Strokes, and Rage Against the Machine. One viral video on TikTok shows a Thai woman holding a mock marriage ceremony with a cutout of Mr. Pita, who is divorced and has a young daughter.Supporters cheer for Mr. Pita and his Move Forward Party during the rally in Nonthaburi on Thursday.Lauren DeCicca for The New York Times“For a lot of the middle class, especially upper-middle class Thais, he’s like the ideal son-in law that you’d like to have — very educated, accomplished, good-looking, poised,” said Duncan McCargo, a political science professor at the University of Copenhagen.Mr. Pita was drawn to the ideas of the founder of the Future Forward party, Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, in 2018, and within a few months was asked to join. He became the leader of Move Forward after Thailand’s Constitutional Court dissolved Future Forward in 2020 and barred its senior executives from politics for 10 years.If his bid for prime minister is successful, Mr. Pita has promised to reset Thailand’s foreign policy, saying the country would “not be part of the Chinese umbrella or the American umbrella,” but will have the ability to determine its own destiny, Mr. Pita said. In March 2022, after Moscow invaded Ukraine, he wrote on Twitter that the Russians must “retrieve” their troops immediately.“A lot of it is personal,” said Fuadi Pitsuwan, a fellow at Chiang Mai University and foreign policy adviser to Mr. Pita, referring to the candidate’s strong reaction to the invasion. “He will be a foreign policy leader, which, in Thailand, is rare.”Mr. Pita takes a moment for an iced latte in Bangkok before heading to Nonthaburi Province on Thursday.Lauren DeCicca for The New York TimesMr. Pita’s reputation has not gone unscathed. His ex-wife, Chutima Teepanart, an actress with whom he shares a daughter, accused him of domestic violence in 2019. A family court found Mr. Pita not guilty of the charge. Ms. Chutima did not respond to multiple requests for comment.In an interview, Mr. Pita said “there was no domestic violence, whether it’s physical abuse or emotional abuse, ever in my family.”Mr. Pita was born to a wealthy, well-connected family. His late father served as an adviser to the agriculture minister, and his uncle was once a close aide to Thaksin Shinawatra, the populist billionaire whose youngest daughter was one of Mr. Pita’s rivals in the election.His uncle was a former commerce minister in the early 1980s but was later jailed for misconduct when he was a banker, a case that Mr. Pita described as politically motivated. A salient childhood memory includes visiting his uncle in prison, which made him see “how dirty or how brutal politics could be,” he said.Over the years, Mr. Pita said he was struck by how Thailand seemed constantly trapped in a cycle of political turmoil, precipitated either by people “using the king to destroy a political opponent or using the monarchy as an excuse to fight for something.”He started studying other countries with constitutional monarchies including England, Japan and Norway, and said he began to see why the relationship between the Thai monarchy and the people was “going downhill” with each passing decade.Mr. Pita entering a news conference on Thursday, to speak with journalists about forming a coalition with other political parties.Lauren DeCicca for The New York TimesWith Move Forward, he wants “to have a comprehensive discussion in Parliament about what the role of the monarchy in a constitutional democracy should be in modern Thailand,” an idea that was once considered taboo among many Thais for whom the royal family has become a fixture in daily life.In a response to calls for checks on the monarchy’s power — precipitated by protests in 2020 — the military and royalists have come together to defend the institution.In the aftermath of the protests, Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the general who led the previous coup and whose party was trounced in the election, ordered a crackdown. More than 200 protesters, including 17 minors, have since been detained for criticizing the monarchy.During a final rally before the vote, Mr. Pita reminded the crowd that even a 15-year-old girl had been among those detained for violating the royal criticism law. On Monday, he spoke in front of thousands of his supporters as they celebrated his election victory.Standing in front of a giant portrait of the king in the center of Bangkok, he addressed the crowd, telling them “a new day for the people has arrived.”Ryn Jirenuwat More

    • 88 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Ecuador’s President Dissolves Congress Amid Impeachment Trial

      by

      President Guillermo Lasso disbanded the National Assembly as the opposition-led body was trying to oust him on embezzlement charges.President Guillermo Lasso of Ecuador disbanded the country’s opposition-led National Assembly on Wednesday, a drastic move as the right-leaning leader faced impeachment proceedings over accusations of embezzlement.The constitutional measure, never before used, allows the president to rule by decree until new elections can be held, marking a moment of extraordinary political turbulence for a country of 18 million already in turmoil.Ecuador has long been a relative haven in the region, but in recent years it has been convulsed by rising violence and a skyrocketing homicide rate as increasingly powerful narco-trafficking groups fight for territory.Opposition lawmakers accused Mr. Lasso of turning a blind eye to irregularities and embezzlement in a contract between a state-run shipping company and an oil tanker company that wasn’t delivering on its promises — allegations first made in news reports. The country’s constitutional court later approved a charge of embezzlement against the president but denied two charges of bribery.The charge was being investigated by congress and is political in nature. It is not a criminal charge.Last week, the National Assembly voted to begin impeachment hearings, but all proceedings were permanently halted once Mr. Lasso dissolved congress.The president has repeatedly denied the charges, pointing out that the contract was signed before he took office.“The prosecutors of this trial have acknowledged that they have nothing,” Mr. Lasso said on Tuesday during the impeachment proceeding. “This inquiry is political.”He added, “This is not about saving a presidency, but about preserving a functioning democracy.”This was the second time the opposition had tried to remove Mr. Lasso from the presidency since he took office in 2021.He has faced growing criticism and petitions for his removal from civil society groups in the face of soaring rates of crime, extortion, kidnappings and robberies. Gangs battle for control of drug routes and have gained greater control over the country’s prisons, leading to several prison riots and massacres over the last three years.For weeks, the president and congress were locked in a game of brinkmanship, with legislators threatening to impeach and remove Mr. Lasso as he threatened to dissolve congress and call new elections — a move known in Ecuador as muerte cruzada, or mutually assured death.The mechanism was written into the Constitution in 2008 as a tool to end deadlocks between the presidency and the legislature. But until now, no president had ever enacted it.With Mr. Lasso’s approval ratings plummeting, in some cases below 20 percent, he will govern by decree until new elections are held. The Constitution gives the national election body seven days to set a date for a presidential and legislative vote. The newly elected president and National Assembly would then govern until the end of the original term, 2025.The disbanding of congress provides temporary stability for the country, said Arianna Tanca, an Ecuadorean political scientist, allowing Mr. Lasso to pass laws without a deadlock and giving political parties the chance for a “reset.”But it also threatens to undercut the country’s democracy. A head of government calling for new elections is common in parliamentary democracies, but has no parallel in other presidential democracies in Latin America, said Mauricio Alarcón Salvador, the director of Transparency International’s chapter in Ecuador.“To see a president shut down the assembly and assume legislative power in a transitory manner is, undoubtedly, a blow to democracy,” he said, “and, above all, to the system of checks and balances that should be in force in any democracy in the world.”Mr. Lasso’s decision comes amid upheaval in the region. In December, Peru’s president attempted to dissolve congress — in this case an illegal move that led to his removal and arrest, and then to widespread protests that left dozens of people dead.In January, supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil stormed government buildings in the capital, arguing that November’s election, in which he was defeated, had been rigged.Will Freeman, a fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that Mr. Lasso’s decision to go around legislators could — possibly — be good for him.“Even though he is very unpopular now, I could see six months of rule by decree actually boosting his popularity if he can do something quickly about the twin crises of crime, and hunger and poverty,” he said. “Although, given his track record, that’s a big if.”Some human rights activists said they worry that Mr. Lasso’s power to govern by decree could open the door for serious rights violations, like using terrorism laws to target Indigenous organizations and other groups that might oppose him.“The executive branch governing by decree could continue to exacerbate and favor the interests of the banks, the oil mining companies and certain privileged sectors, to the detriment of the rights of the majorities,” said Lina María Espinosa, a human rights lawyer.Mr. Lasso’s first act on Wednesday under his new powers was a tax cut for businesses and middle-class Ecuadoreans, a move that was welcomed by María Paz Jervis, the president of the Chambers of Industries and Production, a business group.While the dissolution of the legislature could lead to unrest and hurt the economy, Ms. Jervis said new elections were a positive development for a country that needed economic growth, to fight poverty and to produce more jobs.“After this weariness, after this burden that we have felt with this political class, we believe that it is the moment to inaugurate a new politics in Ecuador,” she said.José María León Cabrera More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      4 Takeaways from Turkey’s Nail-Biting Presidential Election

      by

      Recep Tayyip Erdogan is headed for his — and his country’s — first presidential runoff vote. But the first round showed the longtime leader’s continued strength.Turkey’s nail-biter election will go to a runoff, election officials announced on Monday, extending a pivotal vote that has demonstrated that the incumbent, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is still a formidable political force, despite his failure to secure a first-round victory.Turkey’s Supreme Election Council said the runoff would be held May 28 after official preliminary results showed that Mr. Erdogan had won 49.5 percent of votes and his main challenger, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, 44.9 percent, with nearly all ballots counted. Mr. Erdogan, who has led Turkey for 20 years, appeared to be in a strong position to emerge with another five-year term.After a tumultuous night during which the rival camps each accused the other of rushing to declare results in advance of official tallies, both sides said early on Monday that they would accept a runoff — and predicted they would prevail.President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey failed to win a majority of the vote, setting the stage for a runoff against Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the main opposition candidate.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesSunday’s voting was closely watched around the world for how it could shape the course of Turkey, an important NATO ally with a wide array of diplomatic and economic ties across continents. Of particular interest was the fate of Mr. Erdogan, who has often flummoxed and frustrated his Western partners, including the United States, and faced growing discontent amid high inflation and the destruction wrought by earthquakes in February that killed more than 50,000 in southern Turkey.Before the vote, most polls suggested a slight lead for Mr. Kilicdaroglu, the joint candidate of a newly formed alliance of six opposition parties. But the results showed Mr. Erdogan’s enduring appeal and influence.Here are some key takeaways:Turkey’s first runoffThis is the first election in Turkey’s history in which no presidential candidate secured a majority in the first round. It opens up a complicated two-week window during which the candidates will go all-out to pull more voters into their camps.Voting in Istanbul on Sunday. Turnout across the country exceeded 88 percent, according to the state-run news agency.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesSunday’s election was the country’s second since a 2017 referendum supported by Mr. Erdogan that changed Turkey from a parliamentary to a presidential system. Mr. Erdogan won the last two presidential contests, in 2014 and 2018, outright and by significant margins.His inability to do so this time makes clear that he has lost some support.Erdogan has the edgeMr. Erdogan appears to have the edge with his lead over Mr. Kilicdaroglu, just shy of an outright majority. The elimination of a third candidate, Sinan Ogan, leaves the 5.7 percent of voters who chose him, many of them from the right, up for grabs. Most, if they participate in a runoff, are likely to opt for Mr. Erdogan.In the run-up to the election, Mr. Erdogan freely tapped state resources to improve his chances, raising civil servant salaries and the national minimum wage and unleashing other government spending in an effort to insulate people from the immediate effects of high inflation. He could deploy more such measures between now and the runoff.Also helping Mr. Erdogan make his case is his party’s strong showing in Sunday’s parliamentary vote, which took place at the same time.Supporters of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan outside his campaign headquarters as he spoke there on Monday.Necati Savas/EPA, via ShutterstockPreliminary results suggested that Mr. Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party and its allies would keep their majority in the 600-seat Parliament. That would allow Mr. Erdogan to argue that he should win to avoid a divided government that could hamper the efficient functioning of the state.For his part, Mr. Kilicdaroglu has predicted that he would prevail in a runoff, telling supporters early Monday: “We will definitely win and bring democracy to this country.”Turks’ faith in elections remains highThe election council said that turnout on Sunday surpassed 88.9 percent of the 64 million eligible voters in Turkey and overseas. Some endured long lines and returned to quake-destroyed neighborhoods to exercise what many see as a national duty.The turnout figure is far greater than the 66.6 percent turnout in the 2020 presidential election in the United States. But such high numbers are not unusual in Turkey.Some voters endured long lines to exercise what many see as a national duty.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesIn the last presidential and parliamentary elections, in 2018, around 85 percent of voters cast ballots. And since 1983, turnout in any election — including for mayors and city councils — has never fallen below 74 percent.Many political scientists don’t consider Turkey a pure democracy, largely because of the tremendous power exercised by the president and his ability to shape the political playing field before the vote.But Turks still take elections very seriously. That includes Mr. Erdogan, who told supporters early Monday that he was prepared to face a runoff.“In my political life, I’ve always respected your decision,” he said. “I expect the same democratic maturity from everyone.”Nationalism appeared to prevailTurkish voters may not prioritize foreign policy at the ballot box, but Mr. Erdogan’s decision to step up nationalist rhetoric during the campaign appears to have paid off, both for him and for his conservative parliamentary alliance.During the campaign, Mr. Erdogan had a warship dock in central Istanbul for voters to visit. He escalated his criticism of the United States, even claiming on the eve of the elections that President Biden was seeking to topple him.Mr. Erdogan and members of his party also openly accused the opposition of cooperating with terrorists because they received the support of Turkey’s main pro-Kurdish party. Turkish nationalists often accuse Kurdish politicians of supporting or cooperating with Kurdish militants who have been at war with the Turkish state for decades.Mr. Ogan, the candidate in third place, also spoke about prioritizing ways to send home the millions of Syrian refugees in Turkey and criticized the opposition coalition over its Kurdish support. In a runoff, the candidate who more effectively espouses nationalist positions could pick up more of Mr. Ogan’s supporters. More

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Keir Starmer Is Quietly Bending the U.K. Labour Party to His Will

      by

      Political observers from his own side say he has been “ruthless” in reshaping the party as it looks to reclaim power.LONDON — The leader of Britain’s opposition, Keir Starmer, can often seem more like the technocratic human rights lawyer he once was than the no-holds-barred politician now reshaping the Labour Party with an eye toward making it more electable.But as his former allies on the left wing of his party have discovered, appearances can be deceptive.Mr. Starmer prompted a bitter rift recently when he banned his leftist predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn, from running as a Labour lawmaker, leaving the former leader claiming democratic procedures had been trampled and warning that his supporters were “not going anywhere.”But beneath the ugly media brawl, the unceremonious purging of Mr. Corbyn was a substantive victory for Mr. Starmer, strengthening his already firm grip over the party. Three years after taking over, he has quietly but efficiently marginalized Labour’s once ascendant left-wing, enforced strict discipline over his top political team and grabbed control of the party machinery, including its selection of Labour candidates for Parliament.“So far the processes that he has put in place have been utterly ruthless, and the left underestimated him,” said John McTernan, a political strategist and onetime aide to the former prime minister, Tony Blair.The lesson for his enemies is perhaps not to mistake Mr. Starmer’s courteous and mild-mannered bearing — or absence of fanfare — for a lack of willingness to play political hardball.“Keir Starmer is not narrating what he’s doing,” Mr. McTernan added. “He’s just doing it.”Mr. Starmer banned his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn, center from running as a Labour lawmaker.Henry Nicholls/ReutersTom Baldwin, a senior adviser to another former Labour leader, Ed Miliband, agrees. “In his absolute determination to remove all obstacles to victory, Keir Starmer is more ruthless and competitive than any Labour leader I’ve ever seen,” he said.He added: “Tony Blair had a very clear view about where he wanted to go, but did he chuck any of his predecessors out of the party? No.”A spokesman for Mr. Starmer did not respond to a request for comment.Under Mr. Corbyn’s leadership, Labour’s 2017 general election campaign scored an upset by depriving the prime minister at the time, Theresa May of the Conservative Party, of her parliamentary majority, signaling her political decline. At that zenith of his political career Mr. Corbyn, often likened to Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, basked in the adulation of enthusiastic young supporters, some of whom sang his name at the Glastonbury rock festival.Two years later the bubble burst and Labour suffered its worst general-election defeat since 1935, while Mr. Corbyn’s leadership was tarnished by cases of antisemitism in his party.There followed a highly critical report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission into Labour’s handling of antisemitism complaints. In 2020, when Mr. Corbyn claimed that the scale of the problem was “dramatically overstated” by opponents, Mr. Starmer suspended him from Labour’s parliamentary group, forcing him to sit as an independent.It was at Mr. Starmer’s behest that Labour’s governing body, its National Executive Committee, completed the political purge of the former leader last month, provoking a surprisingly muted reaction from the party’s left wing that underscored its dwindling influence.Jon Lansman, a founder of Momentum, a left-wing pressure group within the Labour movement, told Times Radio that Mr. Starmer “unfortunately is behaving as if he was some kind of Putin of the Labour Party. That is not the way we do politics.”But asked if he would campaign for Mr. Corbyn were the former leader to run for election not as a Labour Party candidate but as an independent, Mr. Lansman replied: “No, I certainly wouldn’t. I want to see Keir Starmer elected as prime minister of this country, and we need a Labour government.”Keir Starmer is widely expected to become the next occupant of 10 Downing Street.Henry Nicholls/ReutersOther internal critics have kept a low profile sensing that they, too, might fall victim to the purge. After all, Mr. Corbyn was not the first left-winger to be exiled to Labour’s equivalent of Siberia. In 2020, Mr. Starmer fired a lawmaker, Rebecca Long-Bailey, from his top team after she shared on Twitter an interview with Maxine Peake in which the actress claimed that the U.S. police tactics that killed George Floyd were learned from Israeli secret services.The silence from internal critics spoke of the political transformation Mr. Starmer has achieved seemingly out of public sight.Elected to Parliament in 2015, Mr. Starmer never adhered to the hard left of the party but nonetheless served in Mr. Corbyn’s top team and campaigned to make him prime minister.When Mr. Corbyn quit as leader in 2019, Mr. Starmer straddled the internal factions, reassuring the left by arguing that Labour should not “oversteer” away from his predecessor’s agenda.Mr. Corbyn’s supporters say that is exactly what Mr. Starmer has done, while other critics argue he has offered no vision to excite voters, seeming content to capitalize on the current Conservative government’s unpopularity.But breaking with Mr. Corbyn, as part of a wider “detoxification” strategy, seems to have helped opinion poll ratings that now put Labour well ahead of the Conservatives.National voting must take place by January 2025. With Mr. Starmer in a seemingly commanding position to become the next prime minister after four successive general-election defeats, Labour lawmakers have found a new discipline, reinforcing their leader’s authority.Mr. Starmer and Rachel Reeves, who leads economic policy for the Labour Party, canvassing last month in Swindon, England.Isabel Infantes/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesFor Mr. Starmer there are some dangers in purging his predecessor. Were Mr. Corbyn to run as an independent in the constituency in north London that he has represented since 1983 (including for more than a decade when Mr. Blair led the party), he might win. Even if he lost, Mr. Corbyn could attract media attention and distract from Labour’s wider campaign.Another risk is that the party loses some of the young, enthusiastic supporters that Mr. Corbyn attracted.James Schneider, a former aide to Mr. Corbyn, described Mr. Starmer’s approach as a “barefaced political attack on the ideas and social forces that were mobilizing to redistribute wealth and power in this country, and that came quite close to taking office” in the 2017 general election.The assault on the left had, Mr. Schneider conceded, been “in a technical sense extremely effective and swift,” catching that wing of the party off guard, adding, “I don’t think anyone thought it would be quite so dramatic and quite so total as it has been.”Such is the stifling control exercised by Mr. Starmer’s allies that only one candidate from the left has so far succeeded in dozens of Labour internal selections for parliamentary candidates, Mr. Schneider said.Critics have accused the party leadership of fixing the process, weeding out candidates it dislikes with “due diligence” checks (claims it denies).But ensuring that Mr. Starmer can rely on those elected on a Labour ticket could be critical if the next general election is close, and if the party wins a small majority.Allies say Mr. Starmer’s uncompromising tactics have paid off. Mr. McTernan, the former Blair aide, described his hold over Labour as “undislodgeable,” adding that he has tight control over its lawmakers, the National Executive Committee and the shadow cabinet — Mr. Starmer’s top team.“He also has the trade unions loyally lined up behind him, so it’s hard to know what else he needs to do,” Mr. McTernan said. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Scotland’s National Party Picks Humza Yousaf to Succeed Sturgeon

      by

      Humza Yousaf is on course to become the first Muslim to lead a democratic western European nation, and when that happens, he will confront several daunting obstacles.The pro-independence Scottish National Party on Monday elected Humza Yousaf, the country’s health secretary, as its top official, putting the 37-year-old minister on track to become the first Muslim to lead a democratic western European nation.Mr. Yousaf emerged with a narrow victory in a bruising leadership race that followed the surprise resignation last month of Nicola Sturgeon, who had dominated Scottish politics for almost a decade as the country’s first minister and leader of the S.N.P.In choosing Mr. Yousaf, members of his party opted for the candidate thought most likely to stick with Ms. Sturgeon’s progressive agenda, rejecting a more socially conservative contender, Kate Forbes.“We will be the generation that delivers independence for Scotland,” said Mr. Yousaf after the result was announced, and before a vote on Tuesday in the Scottish Parliament to confirm him as the country’s first minister.As the new leader of the S.N.P. — the largest party in Scotland’s Parliament — that should be a formality. But, referring to some of the wider problems he faces, Mr. Yousaf appealed for unity after a divisive leadership contest that fractured a party previously renowned for its discipline.“Where there are divisions to heal we must do so and do so quickly because we have a job to do, and as a party we are at our strongest when we are united,” he said.In a sometimes emotional victory speech, Mr. Yousaf thanked his family, including his deceased grandparents, who emigrated to Scotland.“I am forever thankful that my grandparents made the trip from the Punjab to Scotland over 60 years ago,” he told the audience at Murrayfield, Scotland’s national rugby stadium, where the leadership results were announced. “As immigrants to this country, who knew barely a word of English, they could not have imagined their grandson would one day be on the cusp of being the next first minister of Scotland.”Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, a research institute that focuses on identity issues, described Mr. Yousaf as “the first Muslim to be elected as a national leader in any western democracy,” writing that it was “a breakthrough moment that should resonate well beyond Scotland.”That in part reflects a growing diversity in the higher reaches of British politics. Anas Sarwar, leader of the Scottish opposition Labour Party, is also Muslim, while Britain’s prime minister Rishi Sunak, follows the Hindu faith.Though Mr. Yousaf was on top after the first ballot, he failed to win more than half of the votes cast by party members in the initial round of voting, as required to win the race. But once the third-place candidate, Ash Regan, was eliminated and her votes were redistributed, Mr. Yousaf won 52.1 percent, to 47.9 percent for Ms. Forbes.Scotland’s outgoing first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, center, at an heatlh center in Fife. She had dominated Scottish politics for almost a decadePeter Summers/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesHaving served as transport minister, justice secretary and health secretary, Mr. Yousaf was seen as the preferred candidate of the party’s establishment, but his record in government was questioned by his opponents.“You were transport minister and the trains were never on time, when you were justice secretary the police were stretched to breaking point, and now as health minister we’ve got record high waiting times,” said Ms. Forbes, his main challenger, during a televised leadership debate.The social conservatism and strong religious beliefs of Ms. Forbes, who was on maternity leave from her position of finance secretary when Ms. Sturgeon quit, featured prominently in the leadership contest.A member of the evangelical Free Church of Scotland, Ms. Forbes said she would have voted against single-sex marriage had she been in the Scottish Parliament when it was approved in 2014, and that she believed that having children outside of marriage is “wrong” according to her faith.Another social question — gender recognition — became a political battleground just before Ms. Sturgeon’s resignation, when Britain’s government rejected legislation from Scotland’s Parliament making it easier for people to change their gender. Mr. Yousaf said on Monday that he would seek to challenge the British government’s decision.Had Ms. Forbes been elected, the Scottish Greens might have withdrawn their support for the S.N.P.-led government in Edinburgh, reducing it to a minority administration.The new leader faces numerous challenges both in replacing Ms. Sturgeon, who was a popular leader and skilled communicator, and in charting a course to independence.Ms. Sturgeon took over the leadership after Scots voted by 55 percent to 45 percent against independence in a referendum in 2014. Since then, sentiment on the issue has not shifted significantly.Ms. Sturgeon’s resignation came after the British Supreme Court ruled that a second referendum could not be held without the agreement of Britain’s government in London, which opposes such a move. Mr. Yousaf’s task will be to try build support for independence to such a level — perhaps around 60 percent in opinion polls — that it would be politically impossible for London to ignore calls for another vote.His leadership victory also has implications for the rest of Britain, where a general election must take place by January 2025. If the result is close, the S.N.P.’s performance could play a decisive role in determining the next prime minister.Given the divisions within the S.N.P. and the difficulties replacing Ms. Sturgeon, Britain’s main opposition Labour Party, which once dominated Scottish politics but has seen its influence dwindle as the S.N.P. gathered strength, now senses an opportunity to claw back some of its old seats in Scotland. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Rahul Gandhi, Leader of India’s Opposition to Modi, Disqualified From Parliament

      by

      The expulsion of Rahul Gandhi is a devastating blow to the once-powerful Indian National Congress party. He and several other politicians are now in jeopardy through India’s legal system.NEW DELHI — Rahul Gandhi, one of the last national figures standing in political opposition to Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, was disqualified as a member of Parliament on Friday, sending shock waves across the country’s political scene and devastating the once-powerful Indian National Congress party Mr. Gandhi leads.Mr. Gandhi was expelled from the lower house the day after a court in Gujarat, Mr. Modi’s home state, convicted him on a charge of criminal defamation. The charge stemmed from a comment he made on the campaign trail in 2019, characterizing Mr. Modi as one of a group of “thieves” named Modi — referring to two prominent fugitives with the same last name. Mr. Gandhi received a two-year prison sentence, the maximum. He is out on 30 days’ bail.Any jail sentence of two years or more is supposed to result in automatic expulsion, but legal experts had expected Mr. Gandhi to have the chance to challenge his conviction. A notification signed by a parliamentary bureaucrat appointed by Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party on Friday stated that Mr. Gandhi had been disqualified automatically by the conviction itself, per the Constitution of India.“They are destroying the constitution, killing it,” said Srinivas B.V., president of the Indian National Congress Party’s youth wing. “The court gave Mr. Gandhi 30 days to appeal against the order, and hardly 24 hours have passed since.”Mr. Gandhi said in a Twitter post on Friday, “I am fighting for the voice of this country. I am ready to pay any price.”Lawmakers from the Congress Party and other opposition parties protesting outside of India’s parliament in New Delhi on Friday.Altaf Qadri/Associated PressMr. Srinivas said the party will fight the expulsion, politically and legally. One of the party’s most prominent members, Shashi Tharoor, who like Mr. Gandhi is a member of the lower house in the state of Kerala, said on Twitter that the action ending his tenure in Parliament was “politics with the gloves off, and it bodes ill for our democracy.”Mr. Gandhi, a scion of the Nehru-Gandhi family whose father, grandmother and great-grandfather served as prime minister, has taken pains to improve his national profile in recent months. He led an unexpectedly popular march late last year across swaths of India, rallying crowds to “unite India” against the Hindu-first nationalism espoused by Mr. Modi. And since the fortunes of Gautam Adani, a tycoon long associated with Mr. Modi, collapsed under pressure from a short-seller’s report in January, Mr. Gandhi has been using his platform in Parliament to call for an investigation of his business empire.The Congress Party is not alone in worrying about the implications for India’s democracy that Mr. Gandhi’s disqualification poses. With parliamentary elections coming next year, the government’s attempts to clamp down on dissent seem to be gaining momentum, other opposition leaders pointed out.Last month, Manish Sisodia, the second in command of the Aam Aadmi Party, was arrested on charges related to fraud. Earlier this month Kavitha K., a leader from a regional party that recently turned to national politics, was questioned by federal investigators in connection with the same case.The string of criminal cases against politicians — though none have been brought against high-profile members of Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P. — contrasts awkwardly with Mr. Modi’s presentation of India as “the Mother of Democracy” during a global publicity blitz to accompany its hosting the Group of 20 summit meeting this year.Police raids against the BBC’s office in India and some of the country’s leading think tanks have intensified doubts about the strength of India’s democracy. Eliminating the opposition from parliament through the courts might heighten those misgivings dramatically. More