More stories

  • in

    At No Labels Event, a Few Disagreements on Policy Seep In

    Senator Joe Manchin III and former Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. stressed that they were not a third-party presidential ticket — yet. And on issues like climate and guns, they debated their views.As the ostensibly bipartisan interest group No Labels discovered on Monday, consensus campaigning and governance is all well and good until it comes time for the details.At an event at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., the group had something of a soft launch of its potential third-party bid for the presidency when Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, and Jon Huntsman Jr., the former Republican governor of Utah, formally released No Labels’ policy manifesto for political compromise.The two men took pains to say they were not the bipartisan presidential ticket of a No Labels candidacy, and that no such ticket would be formed if the Republican and Democratic nominees for 2024 would just embrace their moderation — “that won’t happen if they’re not threatened,” Mr. Manchin said threateningly.On the lofty matter of cooperation and compromise, both men were all in, as were their introducers, Joseph I. Lieberman, a former Democratic senator turned independent, Benjamin Chavis, a civil rights leader and Democrat, and Pat McCrory, a former Republican governor of North Carolina.“The common-sense majority has no voice in this country,” Mr. Huntsman said. “They just watch the three-ring circus play out.”But the dream unity ticket seemed anything but unified when it came down to the nuts and bolts.One questioner from the audience raised her concerns about worsening climate change, the extreme weather that was drenching New England and Mr. Manchin’s securing of a new natural gas pipeline in his home state.To that, Mr. Manchin fell back on his personal preference, promoted in No Labels’ manifesto, for an “all of the above” energy policy that embraced renewable energy sources, like wind and solar, as well as continued production of climate-warming fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas.Mr. Huntsman jumped in to propose putting “a price on carbon,” something usually done through fossil fuel emissions taxes, to curb oil, gas and coal use, proposals that Mr. Manchin, hailing from a coal and gas state, roundly rejected.Asked about gun control, the two could not even seem to agree on the relatively modest proposals in the No Labels plan: universal background checks on firearms purchases and raising the buying age for military-style semiautomatic weapons to 21 from 18.Mr. Manchin, who co-wrote a universal background check bill in 2012 only to see it die in the Senate, said “there’s a balance to be had” in curbing gun purchases. Mr. Huntsman fell back on his party’s decade-long dodge on stricter gun regulation — mental health care.They even seemed to disagree on Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the far-right Republican from Georgia. Mr. Huntsman bristled at being asked about her statement that the United States should withdraw from NATO, saying serious policymakers are too often asked questions about “the flamethrowers.” Mr. Manchin said he would not speak ill of any sitting member of Congress.“All 535 people elected to Congress want to do good,” he said.One thing both men agreed on: No Labels need not divulge the big donors that are fueling the current drive toward a possible third-party bid for the White House. Democratic opponents of the effort have accused the group of hiding a donor list that leans heavily Republican, proof, opponents say, that the drive is all about electing former President Donald J. Trump to a second term.No Labels has denied that but declined to reveal its current donors.“I don’t think it’s right or good. I think there should be transparency and accountability,” Mr. Huntsman said of the group’s decision. “But that’s not the way you play the game.”He added, “The system sucks.” More

  • in

    Canadian Politicians Who Criticize China Become Its Targets

    The polls predicted a re-election victory, maybe even a landslide.But a couple of weeks before the vote, Kenny Chiu, a member of Canada’s Parliament and a critic of China’s human rights record, was panicking. Something had flipped among the ethnic Chinese voters in his British Columbia district.“Initially, they were supportive,” he said. “And all of a sudden, they just vanished, vaporized, disappeared.”Longtime supporters originally from mainland China were not returning his calls. Volunteers reported icy greetings at formerly friendly homes. Chinese-language news outlets stopped covering him. And he was facing an onslaught of attacks — from untraceable sources — on the local community’s most popular social networking app, the Chinese-owned WeChat.The sudden collapse of Mr. Chiu’s campaign — in the last federal election, in 2021 — is now drawing renewed scrutiny amid mounting evidence of China’s interference in Canadian politics.Mr. Chiu and several other elected officials critical of Beijing were targets of a Chinese state that has increasingly exerted its influence over Chinese diaspora communities worldwide as part of an aggressive campaign to expand its global reach, according to current and former elected officials, Canadian intelligence officials and experts on Chinese state disinformation campaigns.Canada recently expelled a Chinese diplomat accused of conspiring to intimidate a lawmaker from the Toronto area, Michael Chong, after he successfully led efforts in Parliament to label China’s treatment of its Uyghur Muslim community a genocide. Canada’s intelligence agency has warned at least a half-dozen current and former elected officials that they have been targeted by Beijing, including Jenny Kwan, a lawmaker from Vancouver and a critic of Beijing’s policies in Hong Kong.After Jenny Kwan, a member of Parliament, began speaking out against Beijing’s crackdown in Hong Kong and its treatment of the Uyghurs, invitations from some organizations dried up.Alana Paterson for The New York TimesThe Chinese government, employing a global playbook, disproportionately focused on Chinese Canadian elected officials representing districts in and around Vancouver and Toronto, experts say. It has leveraged large diaspora populations with family and business ties to China and ensuring that the levers of power in those communities are on its side, according to elected officials, Canadian intelligence officials and experts on Chinese disinformation.“Under Xi Jinping’s leadership, China has doubled down on this assertive nationalist policy toward the diaspora,” said Feng Chongyi, a historian and an associate professor at the University of Technology Sydney. China’s role in Canada mirrored what has happened in Australia, he added.Chinese state interference and its threat to Canada’s democracy have become national issues after an extraordinary series of leaks in recent months of intelligence reports to The Globe and Mail newspaper by a national security official who said that government officials were not taking the threat seriously enough.Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who has been criticized for not doing enough to combat reported interference by China, is under increasing pressure to call for a public inquiry.Current and former elected officials interviewed by national security agents said some of the intelligence appeared to stem from wiretaps of Chinese diplomats based in Canada. The Globe has said that it has based its reporting on secret and top-secret intelligence reports it has viewed.In Vancouver and two surrounding cities — Richmond and Burnaby — that are home to Canada’s largest concentration of ethnic Chinese, the reach of the Chinese Consulate and its allies has grown along with waves of immigrants from China, said longtime Chinese Canadian activists and politicians.Richmond, a city south of Vancouver, has one of Canada’s highest populations of ethnic Chinese and is believed to be a focus of China’s interference in Canadian politics.Alana Paterson for The New York TimesThe Chinese Benevolent Association, or C.B.A. — one of Vancouver’s oldest and most influential civic organizations — was a longtime supporter of Taiwan until it turned pro-Beijing in the 1980s. But it has recently become a cheerleader of some of Beijing’s most controversial policies, placing ads in Chinese-language newspapers to support the 2020 imposition of a sweeping national security law that cracked down on basic freedoms in Hong Kong.The association and the Chinese Consulate publicize close ties on their websites.A former president of the C.B.A., Hilbert Yiu, denied that the organization had any official ties to Chinese authorities, but acknowledged that the association tended to support China’s policies, arguing that Beijing’s human rights record was “a lot better” than in the past.Mr. Yiu, who remains on the C.B.A.’s board, said stories of Chinese state interference in Canadian politics were spread by losing candidates.“I think it doesn’t exist,” Mr. Yiu said, adding instead that Western nations were afraid of “China being strong.”Mr. Yiu, who as a host on a local Chinese-language radio station also pushes pro-Beijing views, was an overseas delegate in 2017 to the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, an advisory body to the Chinese government that Beijing uses to win over and reward supporters who are not members of the Communist Party.The leaders of the C.B.A. — whose opinions hold sway, especially among immigrants not fully comfortable in English — say their organization is politically neutral.But in recent years, it and other ethnic Chinese organizations have excluded politicians critical of Beijing from events, including Ms. Kwan, the Vancouver lawmaker. A member of the left-leaning New Democratic Party, Ms. Kwan has represented, first as a provincial legislator and then at the federal level, a Vancouver district that includes Chinatown since 1996.But after Ms. Kwan began speaking out in 2019 against Beijing’s crackdown in Hong Kong and its treatment of the Uyghurs, invitations dried up — including to events in her district, like a Lunar New Year celebration.“Inviting the local member of Parliament is standard protocol,” Ms. Kwan said. “But in instances where I’ve not been invited to attend — whether or not that’s related to foreign interference are questions that I have.”Fred Kwok, another former C.B.A. president, said Ms. Kwan was not invited to the Lunar New Year celebration because the coronavirus pandemic forced organizers to hold the event virtually and there was “limited time.”Later that year, a couple of months before the federal election, Mr. Kwok held a luncheon for 100 people at a well-known seafood restaurant in Chinatown to support Ms. Kwan’s rival. Mr. Kwok said he was acting on his own behalf and not as the C.B.A.’s leader.Richard Lee, a councilor in Burnaby and a former provincial legislator, faced far worse.Mr. Lee, who immigrated to Canada from China in 1997, and was elected in 2001 to the provincial legislature, became known for supporting local businesses and never missing ribbon-cutting events. He also faithfully attended an annual commemoration of the massacre of pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989.Richard Lee, a city councilor in British Columbia, said he was asked by a former Chinese consul general why he attended an event marking the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre. Alana Paterson for The New York TimesIt was once a low-key event, but with Mr. Xi in power, many participants started wearing masks to hide their identities, fearing reprisals from Beijing.Mr. Lee’s attendance became an issue at a barbecue party in the summer of 2015 when he said that the consul general at the time, Liu Fei, asked him, “Why do you keep attending those events?”Later, in November, Mr. Lee and his wife, Anne, flew to Shanghai. At the airport, he said he was separated from his wife and detained for seven hours while the authorities searched his personal cellphone and a government-issued Blackberry.He asked why and said he was told: “‘You know what you have done. We believe you could endanger our national security.’”He and his wife were put on a plane back to Canada.In Burnaby, the political climate shifted. He was no longer invited to some events because organizers told him that the consul general did not want to attend if Mr. Lee was also present. Longtime supporters started keeping their distance. Mr. Lee said he believed the icy treatment contributed to the loss of his seat in 2017, after 16 years in office.A spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Ottawa did not reply to questions about the consulate’s alleged actions in Vancouver, saying only that “China never interferes in other countries’ internal affairs” and that accusations of interference were an “out-and-out smear of China.”But China’s former consul general in Vancouver, Tong Xiaoling, boasted in 2021, according to The Globe, about helping defeat two Conservative lawmakers, including one she described as a “vocal distractor” of the Chinese government: Kenny Chiu.After arriving from Hong Kong in 1992, Mr. Chiu settled in Richmond, where more than half of the population of 208,000 is made up of ethnic Chinese. He was elected to Parliament in 2019 as a Conservative.Mr. Chiu, 58, quickly touched on two issues that appeared to put him in the cross hairs of Beijing and its local supporters: criticizing Beijing’s crackdown in Hong Kong and proposing a bill to create a registry of foreign agents, inspired by one established by Australia in 2018.Mr. Chiu proposed a bill to create a registry of foreign agents, among the issues that put him in the cross hairs of China and its supporters.Alana Paterson for The New York TimesThe anonymous attacks against him on Chinese social media amplified criticism of the bill among some Canadians that it would unfairly single out Chinese Canadians.A month before the federal election in September 2021, the polls instilled confidence in Mr. Chiu’s campaign staff.But in the final 10 days, Mr. Chiu relayed growing concerns to his campaign manager, Jordon Wood: cooling response from ethnic Chinese voters and increasingly hostile and personal anonymous attacks. The attacks, which were going viral on WeChat, painted his bill as a racist assault on Chinese Canadians and Mr. Chiu as a traitor to his community.Mr. Wood recalled a frantic late-night call from Mr. Chiu after a searing meeting with Chinese Canadian voters.“‘Our community is more polite than this,’” Mr. Wood recalled Mr. Chiu telling him. “Even if you don’t like someone, you don’t go after them in this way. This was a level of rudeness and attack beyond what we would expect.”The attacks on WeChat drew the attention of experts on disinformation campaigns by China and its proxies.The attacks were driven by countless, untraceable human and artificial intelligence bots, said Benjamin Fung, a cybersecurity expert and a professor at McGill University in Montreal.Their proliferation made them especially effective because ethnic Chinese voters depend on WeChat to communicate, said Mr. Fung, who assessed Mr. Chiu’s case shortly after the vote.Less than a week before the vote, a Canadian internet watchdog, DisinfoWatch, noted the attacks against Mr. Chiu on WeChat.“My assumption was that this was a coordinated campaign,” said Charles Burton, a former Canadian diplomat in Beijing and senior fellow at an Ottawa-based research group behind DisinfoWatch.Mr. Chiu made last-ditch efforts to save his campaign, including meeting a group of older people who echoed the attacks against him and his bill on WeChat.“Why would I subjugate my grandchildren to generations of persecution and discrimination?” Mr. Chiu recalled being asked.The next day, he saw social media photographs of the same people publicly backing his main rival from the Liberal Party, Parm Bains, the eventual winner. Mr. Bains declined to comment.Mr. Chiu asked allies to reach out to local leaders who had suddenly dropped him, including prominent members of a Richmond-based umbrella group, the Canadian Alliance of Chinese Associations. Its leader, Kady Xue, did not respond to messages seeking comment.Chak Au, a veteran city councilor nicknamed the “Chinese Mayor of Richmond” and a longtime ally of Mr. Chiu, pressed ethnic Chinese leaders about the sudden erosion of support.“There was a kind of silence,” Mr. Au said. “Nobody wanted to talk about it.”He added, “They didn’t want to create trouble.” More

  • in

    Britain’s Tories Expected to Face Election Losses

    Almost the first thing I saw when I arrived in the London suburb of Uxbridge was two teenage girls in school uniforms getting into a fistfight in the shopping mall outside the underground station. Uxbridge is a middle-class place, stodgy but diversifying, whose voters are squeezed by a cost of living crisis and anxious about rising public disorder. Until last month, it was represented by Boris Johnson, and, as Labour lawmaker Steve Reed told me, it hasn’t sent a member of the left-leaning Labour Party to Parliament since 1966.But last month Johnson, who’d stepped down as prime minister in 2022, resigned his seat rather than face discipline for lying to Parliament regarding his shameless socializing during the pandemic lockdown. And in the election next week to replace him, Labour candidate Danny Beales is considered the favorite, a sign of just how far Tory fortunes have fallen.The contest in Uxbridge and South Ruislip — the full name of Johnson’s former constituency — is one of three elections happening next Thursday to fill seats that Conservatives have vacated. There’s also an election in Selby and Ainsty, where Johnson’s ally Nigel Adams quit shortly after Johnson did, reportedly furious about the political machinations that had thwarted his elevation to the House of Lords. And there’s one in Somerton and Frome, where the Conservative David Warburton resigned in a scandal involving cocaine and allegations of sexual misconduct.A recent poll shows the Labour candidate ahead in Selby and Ainsty, where in 2019 Adams won more than 60 percent of the vote. In Somerton and Frome, the candidate of the centrist Liberal Democrats appears to have a strong chance of prevailing. “My central expectation is that we lose all three,” a Conservative lawmaker told the BBC.Obviously, that’s not guaranteed. When I spoke to Joshua Simons, head of Labour Together, a think tank close to Labour leadership, he suggested that Conservatives were strategically exaggerating their pessimism to lower expectations. Still, there’s a broad sense that, with national elections due sometime in the next 18 months, the Conservative Party is imploding. “We Are on For a Massive Defeat,” blared a headline in the Financial Times, quoting a former Tory cabinet minister.The U.K.’s conservative collapse looks particularly stark when set against the ascendant right in much of the rest of Europe. Italy has a prime minister from a party with fascist roots. The far-right Vox could be part of the next government in Spain. There are right-wing governments in Sweden and Finland. Conservatives just won a second term in Greece. The last French election was a contest between the center-right Emmanuel Macron and the far- right Marine Le Pen, and though Le Pen lost, she appears to be gaining support in the wake of the recent riots. Even in Germany, where shame about the Holocaust once seemed to inoculate its people against right-wing extremism, the reactionary Alternative for Germany just won its first mayoral election, and in a recent poll it was the second most popular party in the country.Yet in Britain, the right appears to be approaching something like free fall, with a recent poll showing Labour with a 21-point lead nationally. It’s quite a turnaround, given that, until recently, the Tories were often called the most successful political party in the world. Less than four years ago, the party won its fourth consecutive national election by a staggering margin, leaving Labour, then led by the leftist Jeremy Corbyn, decimated. “It was catastrophic,” said Reed. “It was really in question as to whether the Labour Party could survive.” A 2021 New Republic article was subtitled, “How the Tories Became Unbeatable.”It would be nice, as someone who wants to see social democracy thrive, to report that Labour has since discovered some brilliant strategy for beating the right. In truth, though, if conservative hegemony in Britain is starting to break down, the Tories deserve most of the credit, both for their dissipation and their mismanagement.There have been so many Conservative sex and corruption scandals that the phrase “Tory sleaze” has become a cliché, and the ruling party’s decadence is matched by its incompetence. Covid created economic misery worldwide, but since the pandemic the U.K. has performed significantly worse than its peers in the rest of Europe. Among the reasons for this malaise are the fallout from Brexit, finalized in 2020, and the supply-side fantasies of Liz Truss, Johnson’s successor, who sent the economy into a tailspin during her 44 days in office.Today inflation is no longer in the double digits, but as of May, it was still at 8.7 percent, “the highest among the world’s big, rich economies,” as Reuters reported. Rent has reached record highs, and spiking interest rates are clobbering homeowners, since unlike in America, most British mortgages have their rates locked in for only two or five years. “People are seeing, you know, £500 to £600 a month increases in their mortgages, which people just can’t afford at the moment,” said Reed.Britain’s prized National Health Service is in crisis as well, with a record 7.47 million people on waiting lists for routine hospital care. On Thursday, junior doctors — postgraduate trainees who make up about half of doctors in English hospitals — went on strike over low pay. That comes after a nurses’ strike that ended late last month. Reed, who is chairing Beales’s Labour campaign in Uxbridge, points out that the hospital there is crumbling. “There is literally masonry falling out of the roofs, and parts of it are closed off because water is leaking through the roof,” he said.Simons of Labour Together told me he’s visited Uxbridge twice in the last week, and said that voters there “hate the Tories, and hate British politics at the moment.” Now, that’s very different from saying that people like or trust Labour. Scarred by the mortifying rout of the 2019 election, the Labour politicians I spoke to were decidedly humble about their own connection with voters. But they at least see things trending their way.“I think they’re going to show just how incredibly unpopular the Tories are at the moment,” Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour Party, said of next week’s elections. “And I think they’ll show how much work the Labour Party has done to regain the trust. We’re still on that journey, by the way. I’m not complacent about that. But I think people are starting to listen to the Labour Party now.” For that, they have the Tories to thank.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. More

  • in

    Elecciones en Guatemala: incertidumbre tras la suspensión de Movimiento Semilla

    La medida pone en riesgo la candidatura presidencial de Bernardo Arévalo, un contendiente anticorrupción que sorprendió en la primera vuelta y pasó al balotaje.Las elecciones presidenciales de Guatemala se vieron envueltas en una tormenta política la noche del miércoles luego de que un fiscal suspendió la personalidad jurídica del partido de un candidato anticorrupción en ascenso, lo que pone en riesgo su intento de participar en la segunda vuelta y posiblemente asesta un golpe a una democracia ya en crispación.La medida podría evitar que Bernardo Arévalo, un congresista que remeció a la clase política en junio con un apoyo sorpresivo en las urnas que lo catapultó a la segunda vuelta del 20 de agosto, se enfrente a Sandra Torres, otrora primera dama.Rafael Curruchiche, el fiscal que integró el caso para suspender al partido, ha sido a su vez incluido en una lista de Estados Unidos de funcionarios centroamericanos corruptos por obstaculizar investigaciones de corrupción.Este suceso añade más tensión al sistema político de Guatemala, luego de que se impidiera la participación de varios de los principales candidatos a la presidencia, que eran percibidos como una amenaza para las élites políticas y económicas, además de los ataques a la libertad de prensa y el exilio forzado de decenas de fiscales y jueces dedicados a combatir la corrupción.“Nos están robando las elecciones, a plena luz del día, usando en contra las propias instituciones que nos deberían de proteger”, dijo en Twitter Gustavo Marroquín, profesor de historia y columnista.La medida del fiscal suscitó confusión e indignación en la capital de Guatemala, donde cientos de personas se reunieron a protestar el miércoles poco después del anuncio de Curruchiche. El fiscal tomó la decisión cuando las autoridades electorales de Guatemala se preparaban para desestimar oficialmente los intentos de postergar la segunda vuelta y permitir que las votaciones transcurrieran de acuerdo a lo planeado.Cuando se le preguntó por las medidas del fiscal contra el partido de Arévalo, la magistrada presidenta de la autoridad electoral, Irma Elizabeth Palencia, dijo que “es algo que nos preocupa”.El principal funcionario del Departamento de Estado de EE. UU. para el Hemisferio Occidental, Brian Nichols, dijo en Twitter que el gobierno estadounidense estaba “profundamente preocupado” por lo que describió como las “amenazas a la democracia electoral de Guatemala” por parte de Curruchiche. “Las instituciones deben respetar la voluntad de los votantes”, añadió Nichols.El partido de Arévalo puede apelar el fallo, lo cual desencadenaría una batalla legal y podría plantear el tema a la corte constitucional más alta de Guatemala.Curruchiche indicó que el caso contra el partido de Arévalo, Movimiento Semilla, involucraba denuncias de que había usado firmas fraudulentas para calificar como partido político. Luego de que su despacho investigó el caso, un juez penal ordenó la suspensión del registro de Semilla, lo que podría prohibir su participación, y la de Arévalo, en la segunda vuelta.Arévalo dijo a CNN en Español que procedería con su candidatura y asegura que según la ley guatemalteca los partidos políticos no pueden ser suspendidos durante un proceso electoral (la primera vuelta de votación se llevó a cabo el 25 de junio y se espera que la segunda vuelta sea el 20 de agosto).“Los poderosos ya no quieren que el pueblo decida libremente su futuro, pero los vamos a vencer”, dijo Arévalo en Twitter la noche del miércoles.Los juristas cuestionaron la decisión de Curruchiche, aliado del presidente saliente, Alejandro Giammattei. Un experto en derecho constitucional, Edgar Ortiz Romero, dijo que la medida estaba “violando abiertamente el orden legal”, ya que un juez de lo penal no puede suspender el registro de un partido bajo la ley electoral guatemalteca.“Creo que esto nos pone en el triste grupo de países con rasgos autoritarios más avanzados donde se usa el sistema legal para atacar a opositores”, dijo Ortiz Romero.Mirador Electoral, un grupo independiente de vigilancia electoral, dijo en un comunicado que la suspensión “intenta consumar un golpe electoral equivalente a un golpe de Estado en el país”.Emiliano Rodríguez Mega es un investigador reportero del Times en Ciudad de México. Cubre México, Centroamérica y el Caribe. Más de Emiliano Rodríguez Mega.Simon Romero es corresponsal nacional y cubre el suroeste de Estados Unidos. Ha sido jefe de las corresponsalías del Times en Brasil, los Andes y corresponsal internacional de energía. Más de Simon Romero. More

  • in

    Guatemala’s Top Party Is Suspended, Putting Election Into Turmoil

    The move threatens the presidential bid of Bernardo Arévalo, an anticorruption candidate who made a surprisingly strong showing in the initial voting, propelling him into a runoff.Guatemala’s presidential election was thrown into turmoil Wednesday night after a top prosecutor moved to suspend the party of a surging anticorruption candidate, threatening his bid to take part in a runoff and potentially dealing a severe blow to the country’s already fraying democracy.The move could prevent Bernardo Arévalo, a lawmaker who jolted Guatemala’s political class in June with a surprise showing propelling him in the Aug. 20 runoff, from competing against Sandra Torres, a former first lady.Rafael Curruchiche, the prosecutor who mounted the case to suspend the party, has himself been listed among corrupt Central American officials by the United States for obstructing corruption inquiries.The development places even greater stress on Guatemala’s political system, after the barring of several top presidential candidates who were viewed as threatening to the political and economic establishment, assaults on press freedom and the forced exile of dozens of prosecutors and judges focused on curbing corruption.“They are stealing the election in broad daylight, using one of the very institutions which is supposed to protect us,” Gustavo Marroquín, a history professor and columnist, said on Twitter.The prosecutor’s move fueled confusion and anger in Guatemala’s capital, where hundreds of people gathered in protest Wednesday shortly after Mr. Curruchiche’s announcement. The prosecutor took the action as Guatemala’s election authority was preparing to officially dismiss efforts to delay the runoff, allowing the vote to proceed as planned.When asked by reporters about the prosecutor’s move against Mr. Arévalo’s party, Irma Elizabeth Palencia, the election authority’s leader, said, “It is definitely something that worries us.”Brian Nichols, the top State Department official for the Western Hemisphere, said on Twitter that the United States government was “deeply concerned” by what he described as Mr. Curruchiche’s “threats to Guatemala’s electoral democracy.” “Institutions must respect the will of voters,” Mr. Nichols added.Mr. Arévalo’s party can appeal the ruling, setting the stage for a legal battle and potentially sending the issue to Guatemala’s top constitutional court.Mr. Curruchiche said the case against Mr. Arévalo’s party, called Semilla, or Seed, involved claims that it used fraudulent signatures to qualify as a political party. After his office looked into the case, a criminal judge ordered the suspension of Semilla’s registration, which could effectively prohibit the party, and Mr. Arévalo, from competing in the runoff.Speaking on CNN en Español, Mr. Arévalo said he would proceed with his candidacy, contending that under Guatemalan law political parties cannot be suspended during an electoral process (the first round of voting took place on June 25 and the runoff is set for Aug. 20).“The powerful no longer want the people to freely decide their future, but we will defeat them,” Mr. Arévalo also said on Twitter on Wednesday night.Legal experts questioned the move by Mr. Curruchiche, an ally of the outgoing president, Alejandro Giammattei. Edgar Ortiz Romero, a constitutional law expert, said the move was “absolutely illegal” since a criminal judge cannot suspend a party’s registration under Guatemalan election laws.“This places us in the sad group of countries with advanced authoritarian features in which the legal system is used to attack opponents,” Mr. Ortiz Romero said.The independent watchdog group Mirador Electoral said in a statement that the suspension “attempts to consummate an electoral coup equivalent to a coup d’état.” More

  • in

    Thailand Parliament Vote: Pita Limjaroenrat Faces Setbacks

    The Thai military’s hold on the Senate blocked a popular progressive candidate who had emerged as the clear winner. Parliament will now have to vote again, as the opposition vows to demonstrate.The takeaway from Thailand’s general election in May was clear: Voters had dealt a crushing blow to the ruling military junta by supporting a progressive party that challenged not only the generals but also the nation’s powerful monarchy.The generals and their allies responded on Thursday by rejecting the party’s leading candidate for prime minister, tipping the country into a political void and potentially thrusting it further toward autocracy.Parliament failed to elect a new prime minister on Thursday evening after the progressive candidate, Pita Limjaroenrat, was unable to muster enough support in the military-backed Senate, where lawmakers are loyal to the generals who have governed Thailand since seizing power in a coup nearly decade ago.As night fell over a rainy Bangkok, one of Southeast Asia’s most important economies was staring down what looked like another intense period of political unrest and nationwide protests.“This is déjà vu,” said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political science professor at Chulalongkorn University, referring to the cycles of elections, protests, coups and crackdowns that have occurred in Thailand since 2007.Now it is up to Parliament to pick from the field of candidates again, through what is likely to be a tumultuous week ahead that may or may not end with a new prime minister in charge. A second vote is scheduled for July 19. A third, if necessary, would be held a day later.While Mr. Pita, 42, is relatively new to Thailand’s political drama, the queasy feeling of drifting toward civil strife is not. The country’s recent history is littered with military coups; protesters have led widespread demonstrations against a royalist establishment that they say has consistently thwarted efforts to introduce democratic reforms.“There’s a pattern here of establishment pushback against any progressive movement in Thai politics,” Mr. Thitinan added. “And the pushback comes in different shapes and forms,” including dissolutions of political parties and disqualifications of major candidates.Supporters of Mr. Pita and the Move Forward party outside of Parliament in Bangkok on Thursday.Mailee Osten-Tan/Getty ImagesAhead of the vote on Thursday, Mr. Pita, a former technology executive who holds graduate degrees from prestigious American universities, had positioned himself as a champion of reform. On the campaign trail he called for amending a law that criminalizes public criticism of the Thai monarchy — a move considered unthinkable a decade ago.“I want to be the leader of the people,” he said in Parliament on Thursday. “To tell the world that Thailand is ready. To look for a new balance between international political powers.”But Thailand’s Parliament appeared unwilling to embrace such a vision. Even though Mr. Pita’s political party, Move Forward, had built a multiparty coalition, he received only 324 combined votes in the House of Representatives and the Senate — short of the 376 he needed to win the premiership.Supporters of Mr. Pita’s coalition had gathered on Thursday outside the parliament building in Bangkok where the vote was held, and some had vowed to hit the streets in protest if he did not win enough votes to become prime minister.“The votes that have been cast, the 25 million votes, are sacred voices that will shape the future of the country,” Arnon Nampha, a political activist and protest leader, said during a protest on Wednesday night, referring to the votes in May for Move Forward and Pheu Thai, the second-largest party in the coalition.“If you want to change this, no way, we will not allow it,” he added.Mr. Thitinan said he expected a reprise of the flash mob-style protests that erupted in Thailand during the coronavirus pandemic and were led by young demonstrators calling for checks on the Thai monarchy’s vast power.Mr. Pita had already been dealt a major setback on Wednesday when Thailand’s Election Commission asked the Constitutional Court to suspend him from Parliament. He had been under investigation for allegedly owning undeclared shares in a media company, which could disqualify him from running for office.Even though Mr. Pita’s Move Forward had built a multiparty coalition, he was short of the 376 votes he needed to win the premiership.Rungroj Yongrit/EPA, via ShutterstockThe Constitutional Court also said on Wednesday that it had accepted a complaint against Mr. Pita over his calls to amend the law that penalizes criticism of the monarchy. Analysts predicted that both moves would give Mr. Pita’s opponents in the Senate a convenient excuse not to vote for him.Mr. Pita’s progressive coalition may not be strong enough to weather the loss. Members of Pheu Thai, in particular, could try to form a new coalition that is led by one of its own candidates for prime minister.A likely scenario is that Pheu Thai would field Srettha Thavisin, a property tycoon who is considered a more palatable candidate among Thailand’s military establishment. Military-backed lawmakers may vote for Mr. Srettha, said Wanwichit Boonprong, a political scientist at Rangsit University, outside Bangkok.Still, he said, Pheu Thai could be a good compromise for reform-minded voters who had supported Mr. Pita.As for the old guard, Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, the general who took power after leading Thailand’s 2014 military coup, said on Tuesday that he would retire from politics once a new government is formed. But even if he does retire, analysts said the military and its allies may try to hold onto power in other ways.The military has engineered a system in which it essentially controls one chamber of the legislature, the Senate. To keep one of its own in charge, the military could promote Gen. Prawit Wongsuwan, a member of the ruling party, as a possible candidate for prime minister during the vote next week.“Almost all the senators were handpicked by General Prawit,” said Jade Donavanik, an expert on Thai politics at the College of Asian Scholars in Thailand, referring to the 250 members of that chamber. “This is part of the problem.”The military could promote Gen. Prawit Wongsuwan, a member of the ruling party, as a possible candidate for prime minister during the vote next week.Jack Taylor/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesPheu Thai may field Srettha Thavisin, a property tycoon who is considered a more palatable candidate to Thailand’s military establishment than Mr. Pita.Jack Taylor/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe election is being closely watched, not least because Thailand is a major player in a region where several countries have been sliding again toward autocracy after experiments with democracy. Thailand was once a stable ally of the United States but has moved closer to China under the current junta.For decades, the country was dominated by two opposing political forces — one led by conservative royalists and militarists, the other by Thaksin Shinawatra, a former telecommunications tycoon and populist politician who served as prime minister for five years before he was ousted in a 2006 coup.His sister Yingluck Shinawatra became prime minister 2011 and was forced from office days before the 2014 coup.Move Forward has captured a similar sort of energy that Mr. Thaksin’s populist movement once did, and its failure on Thursday appeared to be another example of Thailand’s royalist establishment snuffing out a popular political candidate.Mr. Wanwichit, political scientist at Rangsit University, said that Move Forward’s aggressive calls for reforming the monarchy may have been too extreme for most voters, even those who consider themselves liberal and in favor of democratic reform.“For now, the monarchy is seen as the main pillar of the country,” he said. “Whether you are liberal or conservative, you still respect the monarchy as embodying the dignity of the nation.” More

  • in

    Finnish Right-Wing Party Leader Apologizes After Racist Posts Surface

    Riikka Purra, who leads the nationalist Finns party, was the second member of her faction to come under fire for offensive comments since the government was formed a month ago.Finland’s deputy prime minister apologized on Tuesday for “stupid social media comments” after a series of racist and sometimes violent remarks posted in 2008 surfaced in the Finnish press — the latest scandal for the party she leads, the right-wing Finns, since it joined the country’s governing coalition less than a month ago.Though the deputy prime minister, Riikka Purra, did not say the posts, published under the user name “riikka,” were hers, she said in a Twitter thread, “I apologize for my stupid social media comments 15 years ago and for the harm and resentment that they understandably caused. I’m not a perfect person, I’ve made mistakes.”According to local news media reports, in posts on a right-wing blog in 2008, “riikka” repeatedly used a racist Finnish slur against Black people, described Turkish people in derogatory terms and asked if there were any like-minded people in the city on a particular day to beat Black children. The blog was hosted by the former Finns party leader Jussi Halla-aho, who was fined by Finland’s highest court for racist incitement in 2012. The comments attributed to “riikka” are not currently on the blog. The Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat tracked Ms. Purra’s whereabouts in one instance and linked it to a post from that location.Ms. Purra did acknowledge on Tuesday that she had posted on the blog “in ways and with words that today I absolutely do not accept and would not use,” though she did not identify specific posts.Her apology came as Finland’s president, Sauli Niinistö, was attending the country’s first NATO meeting as a full member of the alliance. In reference to the incident at home, Mr. Niinistö urged the governing coalition to adopt a “clear zero-tolerance position to racism,” although he added that racial prejudice was different than opposing immigration.In Finland’s recent elections, Ms. Purra’s Eurosceptic, anti-immigration party took 46 seats in the country’s 200-strong Parliament, the faction’s strongest-ever showing. Last month, Finns joined a four-party ruling coalition and picked up seven cabinet positions under Prime Minister Petteri Orpo of the National Coalition Party.Mr. Orpo thanked Ms. Purra for “making the right decision” and gave no indication that she would be forced to resign. “The government will not fall because of this,” Mr. Orpo said.“The government has jointly committed to the principles of nondiscrimination and equality,” Mr. Orpo wrote on Twitter. “Everyone in Finland must feel that they are safe.”Johanna Vuorelma, a researcher at the University of Helsinki, said the recurring scandals had weakened Mr. Orpo’s coalition, although it was not in imminent danger of collapse. Mr. Orpo’s alliance unseated the former prime minister, Sanna Marin, who now leads the country’s opposition. She wrote on Twitter, “Nothing that has come up about the party over the last few weeks has been new or surprising,” and called on the government to “directly and unequivocally renounce racism, hate speech and violence.”Ms. Purra is not the first Finns member to have the past catch up with her.Vilhelm Junnila, another Finns minister, resigned last month after reports in the Finnish news media of his far-right sympathies, which included him joking about a Finns candidate’s electoral number, 88, a well-known neo-Nazi code for “Heil Hitler.” More

  • in

    Mark Rutte, Netherlands Prime Minister, Says He Will Leave Politics

    Mr. Rutte, the country’s leader since 2010, announced the collapse of his government on Friday. New elections are expected this fall.Prime Minister Mark Rutte, the Netherlands’s longest-serving prime minister, said on Monday that he would step aside as his party’s leader and would be leaving politics in the coming months after his governing coalition collapsed last week.Mr. Rutte came to power in 2010 and earned the name “Teflon Mark” for his ability to weather political storms, but the failure of the four parties in his coalition to come to an agreement on the country’s migration policies set the stage for elections in the fall.The leader of the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, Mr. Rutte, 56, remains in charge of a caretaker government.“This isn’t entirely without emotion,” he told reporters, according to the broadcaster NOS. “But it feels good to pass the baton.”Caroline van der Plas, leader of the Farmer-Citizen Movement, a pro-farmer party that swept local elections in the Netherlands this year, said that she welcomed the chance for voters to go to the polls this fall. Attje Kuiken, leader of the Labor Party, said on Twitter this weekend that “Mark Rutte is done governing.”Mr. Rutte’s coalition collapsed after he failed to convince the more centrist members of his coalition to back more restrictive migration policies, a sign of the potency of that issue in European politics.The government had been negotiating the terms of family reunification for refugees and also whether to create two classes of asylum: a temporary one for people fleeing conflicts, and a permanent one for people fleeing persecution.The goal of both proposals was to reduce the number of refugees, a reflection of the desire to head off right-wing parties outside the coalition who have been making political inroads by tapping into voter concerns about immigration.The other coalition parties were ready to agree to the two-tier asylum system, but they would not endorse Mr. Rutte’s proposal for a two-year waiting period before refugees already living in the Netherlands could be joined by their children.That impasse ultimately led Mr. Rutte to offer the resignation of his government to King Willem-Alexander in writing on Friday night.Mr. Rutte has long been known for a no-nonsense approach to politics and a modest lifestyle. He pays for his own coffees. When attending public events, he stands in line with everyone else. In true Dutch fashion, he prefers to ride his bicycle to work. On Saturday, Mr. Rutte drove himself to see the king in a Saab he has had for years.Mr. Rutte’s tenure has not been without scandal. In 2021, his government collapsed after a report showed a systemic failure by his government to protect thousands of families from overzealous tax inspectors. More