More stories

  • in

    Greece Moves to Block Extreme-Right Party as Election Nears

    A new law targets a party founded by an imprisoned former official of the neo-Nazi group Golden Dawn. But critics say its reach could be wider.Greece’s government has moved to block from Parliament an extreme-right party seen as a successor to the neo-Nazi group Golden Dawn, which shot to prominence a decade ago but was effectively banned after being declared a criminal organization.On Wednesday, a government-sponsored bill in Parliament that bars from the legislature parties whose leaders have been convicted of serious crimes and are deemed a potential threat to democracy passed with the votes of the ruling conservatives and the opposition Socialist party, who control a total of 178 seats out of the 300 in the house. The main leftist Syriza party abstained, and smaller opposition parties voted against it.While it was not explicitly mentioned in the bill, the new legislation would effectively disqualify National Party — Greeks, a party founded by a former top official of Golden Dawn, Ilias Kasidiaris, on the grounds that he is a convicted criminal.Government officials have named Mr. Kasidiaris as the target of the bill and on Tuesday he sent an injunction to the speaker of Parliament demanding that it be revoked.Mr. Kasidiaris, who has a tattoo of a swastika that he describes as an ancient Greek symbol and has long expressed support for President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, is serving a 13-year jail sentence, but he has campaigned for his new party from his cell.The government’s move came after opinion polls showed that National Party — Greeks would exceed the 3 percent threshold for entering Parliament in elections that are expected in April.Mr. Kasidiaris and other leaders of Golden Dawn were found guilty in October 2020 of running a criminal organization that attacked leftist critics and migrants, and the party, which shot to prominence in 2012 during an economic crisis, was disbanded.The party remained popular even after the arrest of its leadership in 2013, when the murder of a leftist rapper, Pavlos Fyssas, was linked to a member of Golden Dawn. Its lawmakers secured re-election in 2015, while facing criminal charges, and remained in Parliament until 2019, when they failed to win re-election.While the dire conditions that allowed Golden Dawn to thrive are gone — Greece’s economy has been growing since it emerged from its last bailout in 2018 — the new party, which Mr. Kasidiaris founded in 2020, has been gaining popularity amid a broader rise of nationalism in parts of Europe. It campaigns on issues like the deportation of undocumented immigrants and “zero tolerance” for crime.A recent opinion poll put support for Mr. Kasidiaris’s party ahead of the general elections expected in April at around 3.4 percent.But about 70 percent of respondents in the same poll also said the party should be stopped from running in elections, which may have emboldened the government.The bill passed on Wednesday built on a 2021 law that prevented convicted criminals from running as party leaders in elections. The new law extends that ban to a party’s nominal head as well as its “true leadership,” reflecting fears that Mr. Kasidiaris might control legislators from behind the scenes.The bill also stipulates that parties should serve “the free functioning of the democratic Constitution,” a change that some critics said could leave the door open for abuse.Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said the measure’s aim was “not to ban ideas but to safeguard the democratic constitutional order,” noting that similar provisions existed in other European countries. “We have a duty to protect democracy from its enemies,” he told Parliament on Tuesday.While supporting the fundamental aim of the ban, some Greek opposition parties argued that it was too broad.The leftist Syriza party said the legislation could be subject to “misinterpretations” and proposed restricting the ban to parties with Nazi or racist ideologies. Greece’s Communist Party said it included “dangerous generalizations and preconditions for the participation of parties in elections.”Nikos Alivizatos, an expert in constitutional law who was attacked by Golden Dawn members and supporters in 2010, said the provision could lead to “innocent” parties being blocked, and that it would have been better to target violent groups and to simply ban convicted criminals from running as legislators, not just as party leaders.“It’s dangerous to move beyond the criterion of the direct use of violence, because then it becomes an almost philosophical issue, and there is room for varying interpretations,” Mr. Alivizatos said. “The price of every democracy is to tolerate someone who might be a fascist.”In a speech in Parliament before the vote on Wednesday, the leader of Syriza, Alexis Tsipras, argued that Mr. Mitsotakis’s primary aim was to eliminate an electoral rival to his right. “He’s not concerned about blocking Nazis, fascist groups or about cracking down on far-right and nationalist populism,” Mr. Tsipras said. “He’s concerned about getting the votes of the far right and nationalists.”Since Golden Dawn’s demise, other, less extreme parties have emerged on the Greek far right including the nationalist Greek Solution, which has 10 seats in Greece’s 300-member Parliament. But none has espoused a neo-Nazi ideology like Golden Dawn.In promoting his party, Mr. Kasidiaris has sought to cast it as patriotic and anti-establishment and has recorded phone messages for his YouTube channel on topics ranging from Russia’s war in Ukraine (he opposed Greek support for Ukraine’s war effort) to migration (he called for all undocumented migrants to be deported). He has managed to do this despite a ban on cellphones in Greek prisons.In a post on Twitter on Tuesday, Mr. Kasidiaris said the legislation passed on Wednesday, which he said was targeting him, was unconstitutional and violated the European Convention of Human Rights and the principle of free elections.The prime minister insisted that it was not Mr. Kasidiaris’s beliefs that had prompted the intervention, but the crimes for which he, along with other Golden Dawn leaders, was convicted.“No one wants to see parliamentary representation again become a vehicle for violence against citizens, leading to brutal murders, injuries and abhorrent pogroms,” Mr. Mitsotakis said on Tuesday. “No one wants to relive the thuggery οf the past.” More

  • in

    As Sunak Tries to Move Ahead, He’s Haunted by Prime Ministers Past

    Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of Britain made moves to recharge his government, but he is being harried by Liz Truss and Boris Johnson, who are not fading away.LONDON — Prime Minister Rishi Sunak tried to recharge Britain’s beleaguered government on Tuesday, shuffling cabinet ministers and creating new departments to focus on science, technology and energy policy. But even as he moves forward, Mr. Sunak is haunted by his two ousted predecessors, Liz Truss and Boris Johnson, both of whom are mounting noisy rehabilitation campaigns, potentially at his expense.Mr. Sunak framed his latest moves, just after he marked 100 days in office, as a way to meet goals he set out last month, which include cutting inflation in half, reigniting economic growth and shortening wait times in hospitals. He also named a reliable insider to chair the Conservative Party, after being forced to fire the previous chairman, Nadhim Zahawi, over his personal tax affairs.But Mr. Sunak’s critics fell into predictable cavils about “rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.” The Conservative Party, they noted, remains mired behind the opposition Labour Party by double digits in polls. Restructuring government bureaucracy could cause months of policy paralysis. And the drumbeat of bad news, from nationwide strikes to overcrowded emergency rooms, continues without relief.If that is not enough, he is also being harried by Mr. Johnson and Ms. Truss. Both have gleefully disregarded any notions of fading quietly to the backbenches after their truncated stints in Downing Street. And both are defending their legacies in ways that could raise fresh obstacles for Mr. Sunak.Boris Johnson during a visit to the U.S. Capitol last week.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesDuring a visit to Washington last week, Mr. Johnson urged Britain and the United States to supply Ukraine with heavier weapons, including fighter jets — a step Mr. Sunak and the Biden administration have rejected. Political analysts expect he will weigh in on, and could even disrupt, Mr. Sunak’s efforts to break a logjam with the European Union over post-Brexit trade arrangements in Northern Ireland.Ms. Truss has resurfaced to defend her free-market tax cuts which, despite their deeply destabilizing effect on the British pound and mortgage rates, still have defenders in some corners of the Conservative Party.Politics in BritainA Constitutional Rift: Britain’s government blocked new Scottish legislation that would make it easier for people to legally change their gender, stoking a highly charged debate over transgender rights and potentially handing pro-independence forces a potent weapon.Tory Official Ousted: Struggling to dispel an ethical cloud that has hung over his government, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak fired the chairman of the Conservative Party over his personal tax affairs.A New Pledge: In a sweeping speech on Jan. 4, Mr. Sunak laid out a series of promises to restore the country to prosperity, challenging Britons to hold him to account.Worker Strikes: Crippling strikes across multiple industries have Britain’s Conservative government facing a “winter of discontent,” just as a Labour government did 44 years ago.“It’s obviously far from ideal for Rishi Sunak that two former prime ministers are circling around him,” said Matthew Goodwin, a professor of politics at the University of Kent. “His back is against the wall, and the clock is ticking.”The cabinet reshuffle reflected Mr. Sunak’s technocratic instincts, economic focus, and sensitivity to criticism from champions of tax cuts — like Ms. Truss — that he lacks a convincing strategy to kick-start economic growth.But it also underscored Mr. Sunak’s fragile grip on his party and his determination not to weaken it further by alienating colleagues. Unlike many cabinet reshuffles, this one involved no demotions or firings. Having reluctantly removed Mr. Zahawi, he replaced him with Greg Hands, a competent politician short on charisma.Mr. Sunak named Greg Hands to chair the Conservative Party.Isabel Infantes/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThough the sprawling business department led by Grant Shapps was broken up, he was given charge of a new ministry responsible for energy security and climate policy. Kemi Badenoch, a rising star on the party’s right who was international trade secretary, kept that portfolio while gaining responsibility for business policy, a change intended to align trade strategy with the priorities of British business.Rather than sacrificing anyone, the reshuffle brought in a new minister, with Lucy Frazer taking charge of culture, media, and sport.In some ways, Mr. Sunak’s most eye-catching appointment was that of Lee Anderson as the party’s deputy chairman. A combative, outspoken lawmaker who was a longtime member of the Labour Party before switching to the Conservatives, Mr. Anderson is rarely out of the headlines.Most recently, he caused outrage by claiming that many people who go to food banks do not need them; they simply lack the cooking and budgeting skills to make their own affordable meals. Such dubious claims have made Mr. Anderson a hero among some on the right, checking another box for Mr. Sunak.“The prime minister’s room for maneuver is limited economically, and it’s limited politically because he has factions within his party,” said Tony Travers, a professor of politics at the London School of Economics. “Reconstructing the government and changing people’s roles is one of the things that he can do, and he’s done it.”Lucy Frazer was named minister of culture, media and sport.Andy Rain/EPA, via ShutterstockStill, Mr. Johnson’s enduring popularity with the Tory grass-roots points up the attenuated nature of Mr. Sunak’s leadership. He lost a campaign for prime minister to Ms. Truss in the summer and is still blamed by many in the party’s rank and file for his role in forcing out the scandal-scarred Mr. Johnson last July.Ms. Truss poses little direct risk to Mr. Sunak, given how conspicuously she flamed out after only 49 days in office. But she has reappeared to publicly defend her planned tax cuts, saying they remained a recipe for accelerating Britain’s economy. Her argument could raise the pressure on Mr. Sunak to cut taxes, just months after his government mothballed Ms. Truss’ agenda.In a long essay in the Sunday Telegraph over the weekend, Ms. Truss blamed her downfall on virtually everything except herself.“Fundamentally, I was not given a realistic chance to enact my policies by a very powerful economic establishment, coupled with a lack of political support,” she wrote. “I assumed upon entering Downing Street that my mandate would be respected and accepted. How wrong I was.”Mr. Sunak’s predecessor, Liz Truss, lasted only 49 days in office. She has resurfaced recently to defend her tax cut proposals.Tolga Akmen/EPA, via ShutterstockFew political analysts believe Mr. Sunak’s job is in imminent peril. But a disastrous showing by Conservatives in local elections in May could revive rumors of another party coup.Mr. Sunak has avoided being drawn into debates with his predecessors. On Tuesday, his aides played up the policy advantages of the new ministries. Mr. Sunak’s attraction to Silicon Valley, and desire to replicate it in Britain, was evident in his creation of a department for science, innovation, and technology.Mr. Shapps’s energy department seemed especially timely, given Britain’s ordeal with soaring gas prices. It will seek to ensure long-term security of energy supplies, aides said, which could protect the country from future spikes in inflation.But while the new ministries have logic behind them, shake-ups can distract officials, thrusting them into turf wars over who does what. There is still lingering disruption from the 2020 merger of the foreign office and international development department. In the case of the energy ministry, critics said Mr. Sunak was merely undoing a previous error.“Seven years after the disastrous decision to abolish the Department of Energy, the Conservatives now admit they got it wrong,” Ed Miliband, who speaks for Labour on climate change, said on Twitter.Professor Travers said reorganizing departments “says something about political fashion and the government’s priorities.” But he added, “There is vanishingly little evidence that moving responsibilities around and changing names of departments is going to inevitably lead to better government.” More

  • in

    3 Special Elections Will Determine Control of the Pennsylvania House

    Democrats have a good chance of winning a majority in the chamber after a month in which three vacancies have paralyzed it.For a month, the Pennsylvania legislature has been frozen by a handful of vacancies in the State House of Representatives that made the difference between Democratic and Republican control, and by representatives’ inability to agree on basic operating rules.Special elections on Tuesday could bring the General Assembly back to life.Those elections will fill three vacant House seats in Allegheny County — home to Pittsburgh — where Democratic candidates won in November but either did not take office or quickly stepped down. In the 32nd District, the winner, Tony DeLuca, died shortly before Election Day but too late to have his name removed from the ballot. The 34th District’s representative, Summer Lee, was elected to the United States House, and the 35th District’s representative, Austin Davis, was elected as lieutenant governor.Politics Across the United StatesFrom the halls of government to the campaign trail, here’s a look at the political landscape in America.Governors’ Races: Three contests in the South this year will provide a preliminary under-the-radar test of the 2024 election — and further gauge Donald J. Trump’s clout.Arizona Senate Race: Kari Lake, the fiery former news anchor who narrowly lost a race for governor of Arizona last year, said that she is considering a Republican campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2024.North Carolina’s Supreme Court: The court’s new G.O.P. majority will rehear two major voting rights cases decided two months ago, heightening the debate over partisan influences on state courts.Democrats’ Primary Calendar: Upending decades of political tradition, members of the Democratic National Committee voted to approve a sweeping overhaul of the party’s primary process.If Democrats sweep the special elections, as is expected given that all three districts are heavily blue, they will secure the narrowest of majorities in the Pennsylvania House, 102 seats to 101, after 12 years of Republican control. If Republicans win any of the three races, they will have a thin majority.In the 32nd District, the candidates are Joe McAndrew, a former executive director of the Allegheny County Democratic Committee, and Clayton Walker, a Republican pastor. The district is overwhelmingly Democratic; there was no Republican candidate last year, and, even in death, Mr. DeLuca won 86 percent of the vote over a Green Party candidate.In the 34th District, Abigail Salisbury, a Democratic lawyer who ran unsuccessfully against Ms. Lee in the State House primary last year, is her party’s candidate against Robert Pagane, a Republican security guard and former police officer. Ms. Lee was uncontested in the general election in November.In the 35th District, Matt Gergely, a Democrat who is the chief revenue officer of McKeesport, Pa., is facing Don Nevills, a Republican small-business man and Navy veteran. Mr. Nevills received only 34 percent of the vote against Mr. Davis in November.Democrats in Pennsylvania control the governorship but are in the minority in the State Senate. Winning all three races, and thus a House majority, would allow them to block legislation that Republicans have been advancing in recent years, including restrictions on abortion and voting access. If Republicans retain control of both chambers of the legislature, they will be restrained in many respects by Gov. Josh Shapiro’s veto but will be able to bypass it to put constitutional amendments before voters.If Democrats win the chamber and stay united, they can put operating rules in place and start passing legislation after a month of parliamentary paralysis. However, they would need to work with the Republican majority in the State Senate to move anything to Mr. Shapiro’s desk.Up in the air is the fate of Speaker Mark Rozzi, a Democrat who got the job because Republicans, with their temporary 101-to-99 majority, could not unite around one of their own. They chose Mr. Rozzi as a compromise candidate to garner Democratic support. But most Democrats prefer State Representative Joanna McClinton, and they can elect her if they win the majority — though Mr. Rozzi indicated in an interview with The Associated Press that he would try to keep the job.Defying historical midterm election trends, Democrats flipped several state legislative chambers in November, among them, notably, both the Michigan House and the Michigan Senate. In addition to the legislative implications, those victories — including the Pennsylvania House majority, if Democrats secure it on Tuesday — could provide an extra barrier to any Republican efforts to interfere with the administration or results of the 2024 elections. More

  • in

    3 Races for Governor to Watch This Year

    Rogelio V. Solis/Associated PressIn Mississippi, the Republican governor, Tate Reeves, appears to have avoided a rugged Republican primary field, despite his lackluster approval ratings and a water crisis in Jackson. Two potential G.O.P. challengers skipped the race: Philip Gunn, Mississippi’s House speaker, and Michael Watson, the secretary of state. More

  • in

    Republicans Revive a Debate on Term Limits

    Similar proposals to restrict lawmakers’ tenures that the party pushed in the 1990s went nowhere. In this new Congress, the result is likely to be the same.WASHINGTON — In grabbing control of the House, Republicans promised a vote on a proposition that always strikes a chord with frustrated voters: imposing term limits on members of the House and Senate to finally depose those entrenched, out-of-touch lawmakers.Within months of taking power, the new majority put the idea on the floor, where it flopped spectacularly. That episode was in 1995, when Republicans, led by newly installed Speaker Newt Gingrich, pledged a vote on term limits as part of their vaunted Contract with America, only to have the proposal rejected by some of the same folks who signed off on the contract. Voters get much more excited about term limits than do those who would be bound by them.Now the new House Republican majority is again pursuing limits on how long members of Congress can serve, and the result is likely to be the same: failure to garner the votes needed to send a constitutional amendment to the states for approval. But that won’t deter the backers of the plan, who once again say the public is fed up with career politicians and that those who reject term limits do so at their political peril.“This is a long stairway, but you take the first step,” said Representative Ralph Norman, the South Carolina Republican who is the lead backer of term limits in the House. “Let everybody vote up or down. This time I think there will be consequences for those who vote against it. There is a time for politicians to go home and live under some of the rules they have passed.”Mr. Norman said he expects Speaker Kevin McCarthy to allow a vote on the idea in the next few months. A similar resolution in the Senate sponsored by Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, is unlikely to get a vote because it is opposed by both Democratic and Republican leaders.“Leadership in both parties is opposing the overwhelming consensus of the American voters on this issue,” Mr. Cruz said. “The one group that doesn’t support term limits are career politicians in Washington. If it comes to a vote, I think it is hard for elected officials to vote against it.”Critics assail the effort as gimmickry, an easy show vote for lawmakers who want to be seen as fighting the status quo in Washington while knowing they will not have to abide by term limits themselves since there is little chance they will be imposed. Opponents also say that enacting term limits would deprive Congress of the experience and savvy that lawmakers develop over years of serving.“The fact that I have had the institutional memory that I’ve had here has always been helpful to the national debate and certainly back home as well,” said Representative Richard E. Neal, Democrat of Massachusetts and a former Ways and Means Committee chairman just elected to his 18th term. “If you want to turn Congress over to the amateurs and the antis and the special interests, embrace term limits.”Newt Gingrich first oversaw a vote on term limits, which failed decisively, back in 1995.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesThe call for term limits was a central part of Republicans’ takeover of the House in the 1994 midterm elections, helping them build the case that Democrats had become corrupt and arrogant after four decades in power. The “citizen legislature” was a major plank of the contract, pledging a “first-ever vote on term limits to replace career politicians with citizen legislators.” Republicans had also been heartened by seeing state legislatures around the country impose term limits on their office holders.After Republicans won that November, the vote finally rolled around on March 29, 1995. The day before, Mr. Gingrich published an op-ed in The Washington Post laying the groundwork for a loss by blaming Democrats, since the House could not muster the two-thirds majority necessary to send a constitutional amendment to the states — 290 votes — without significant Democratic support.“This vote says to the American people that this is their country,” Mr. Gingrich wrote. “It says to our citizens that they are entrusted with greater control.”Despite his pleas, the vote to impose 12-year limits on both the House and Senate attracted a bare majority of just 227 votes, significantly short of the required supermajority threshold. A barbed Democratic alternative that would have imposed term limits retroactively, knocking out scores of lawmakers of both parties, did not even attract a majority.While Republicans tried to hold Democrats responsible for the failure, 40 Republicans also balked, and 30 of them were among the most senior Republicans in the House. That included Representative Henry J. Hyde, of Illinois, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who won an ovation for his speech in opposition to the proposal.“I just can’t be an accessory to the dumbing down of democracy,” Mr. Hyde told his colleagues.After the defeat, Republicans sought again to make term limits a major issue in the 1996 elections and staged another vote in February 1997. The proposal fared even worse than before, barely surpassing a majority, let alone a supermajority, and any momentum for imposing term limits slowed.The momentum for adhering to personal pledges also dissipated. In one of the best-known cases, George Nethercutt, a Washington Republican who ousted Speaker Thomas S. Foley in 1994 almost solely on the basis of Mr. Foley’s opposition to term limits, reneged on his promise to serve only three terms in the House and was elected twice more.Last year, Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, won a third term in the Senate despite promising to serve only two terms, saying he broke his pledge because the nation was in too much peril for him to leave.The concept of term limits has always been more popular in the House than in the Senate, where seniority is extremely advantageous. Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader who this year broke the record for the longest-serving Senate leader, has been particularly opposed, arguing that elections already serve as term limits.But Mr. Norman, who is in his third full term after winning a special election in 2017, dismisses the idea that experience is a plus in Congress.“Look at the shape of the country,” said Mr. Norman. “I could pick 435 people off the streets to get a better return on investment than with politicians.”The resolution being pushed by Mr. Norman and Mr. Cruz is more restrictive than the ones defeated in the 1990s and would allow just three terms in the House and two in the Senate. Mr. Norman said he is open to slight upward adjustments in House tenure and has said he expects to run just a few more times himself.But Mr. Cruz, who will complete his second term next year, said his support of a two-term limit on senators does not mean he won’t be seeking a third term for himself in 2024, in line with his own bill.“I have never suggested that I support unilateral term limits,” he said. “I would happily comply with them if they applied to everyone. I never said I would do it alone if no one else complied.” More

  • in

    Your Friday Briefing: The U.S. Military Expands in the Philippines

    Also, Vladimir Putin evokes Stalingrad and a contested film is a box-office hit in India.The U.S. is building its military presence in Asia amid a broader effort to counter China.Pool photo by Rolex Dela PenaU.S. increases its military role in the PhilippinesThe two countries announced an agreement that would allow the U.S. to gain access to four more sites in the Philippines. The plans for a larger U.S. military presence in the country come amid fears about a possible Chinese invasion of Taiwan.The deal signifies the first time in 30 years that the U.S. will have such a large military presence in the Philippines. Among the U.S.’s five treaty allies in Asia, the Philippines and Japan are closest geographically to Taiwan, with the Philippines’ northernmost island of Itbayat just 93 miles away.The Philippines’ defense secretary declined to name the locations of the four additional sites, but U.S. officials have long eyed access to land in the Philippines’ northern territory, such as the island of Luzon, as a way to counter China in the event that it attacks Taiwan.A shift in Manila: Since he took office last June, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has sought to revive his country’s relationship with the U.S. after it deteriorated under Rodrigo Duterte. Officials have started building contingency plans for a possible Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Here is a brief history of the U.S. military alliance with the Philippines.China reacts: A spokeswoman for China’s foreign ministry accused the U.S. of threatening regional peace and stability with its announcement. She said countries in the region should “avoid being coerced and used by the United States.”A battle for influence: China and the U.S. are wooing Indonesia. Its strategic location, with about 17,000 islands straddling thousands of miles of vital sea lane, is a defensive necessity as both sides gear up for a possible conflict over Taiwan.Stalingrad, a turning point in World War II, has become a Russian symbol of wartime heroism.Dmitry Lobakin/SputnikPutin evokes StalingradIn a speech delivered in Volgograd, formerly known as Stalingrad, President Vladimir Putin compared Germany’s decision to provide Ukraine with tanks to the Soviet Union’s fight against the Nazis in World War II. He said it was “unbelievable” that Russia was “again being threatened” by German tanks.“We aren’t sending our tanks to their borders,” Putin said. “But we have the means to respond, and it won’t end with the use of armor.”The State of the WarA New Assault: Ukrainian officials have been bracing for weeks for a new Russian offensive. Now, they are warning that the campaign is underway, with the Kremlin seeking to reshape the battlefield and seize the momentum.In the East: Russian forces are ratcheting up pressure on the beleaguered city of Bakhmut, pouring in waves of fighters to break Ukraine’s resistance in a bloody campaign aimed at securing Moscow’s first significant battlefield victory in months.Mercenary Troops: Tens of thousands of Russian convicts have joined the Wagner Group to fight alongside the Kremlin’s decimated forces. Here is how they have fared.Military Aid: After weeks of tense negotiations, Germany and the United States announced they would send battle tanks to Ukraine. But the tanks alone won’t help turn the tide, and Kyiv has started to press Western officials on advanced weapons like long-range missiles and fighter jets.During the defiant speech commemorating the 80th anniversary of the Soviet triumph in the battle over the Nazis in Stalingrad, Putin vowed that Russia would be victorious in Ukraine. His remarks came as Ukrainian officials warned that Moscow was opening a new offensive aimed at capturing more of eastern Ukraine.On the battlefield: Hours before Putin spoke, Russian missiles hit the city of Kramatorsk, a critical base for Ukrainian military operations.Today: Top E.U. officials are in Kyiv for a meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s president. They will discuss Ukraine’s reconstruction and its candidacy for membership in the bloc.“Pathaan” stars a secular Muslim actor who plays a patriotic Indian spy, who is Muslim.Sanjay Kanojia/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA hit movie overcomes politics in IndiaThe spy thriller “Pathaan” has broken a string of box office records despite efforts by right-wing Hindu nationalists to block the film.The fans who flocked to see the Bollywood-infused movie were probably not there to defy hard-right activists, analysts said. Instead, they most likely wanted to see Shah Rukh Khan, the star of the film, who at 57 toned his abs to play an action hero.Khan spent four years off screen after the Hindu nationalist government leveled drug charges against his son, which turned out to be unfounded and which many saw as an attempt to vilify him. “I think it was this thirst to watch Shah Rukh Khan on the screen again,” said Pramit Chatterjee, a film critic and writer. Here’s our review.Context: The movie’s largest political message, if it has one, is that the hero who saves India is a Muslim in a country where 200 million religious minorities are increasingly painted by right-wing Hindu groups as outsiders and threats to the nation.THE LATEST NEWSAsia PacificAustralia’s decision to redesign its 5-dollar note has rekindled the country’s debate about republicanism.Mick Tsikas/EPA, via ShutterstockKing Charles III will not succeed his mother on Australia’s 5-dollar bill, which will instead be redesigned to honor Indigenous people.A U.S. senator called on Apple and Google to remove TikTok from their app stores. Around the WorldAstiyazh Haghighi’s uncovered hair trails behind her as she dances with Amir Mohammad Ahmadi in the video.Iranian authorities sentenced a young couple to five years in prison after they posted a video of themselves dancing in the streets at the height of the protests.Two E.U. lawmakers were stripped of their immunity in connection with claims of influence-peddling involving Qatar and Morocco.A paid version of ChatGPT is coming.The Week in CultureThe Grammy Awards are on Sunday. Here’s a list of nominees.Gawker is closing — again.Yuja Wang played all five of Rachmaninoff’s works for piano and orchestra at Carnegie Hall. That’s sort of the classical music version of climbing Mount Everest.A nonbinary Broadway performer chose to opt out of the Tony Awards rather than compete in a gendered category.As heating and electricity prices soar in Europe, museums are rethinking their conservation climate-control systems.A Morning ReadJacinda Ardern almost exclusively wore pieces by designers from New Zealand.Hannah Peters/Getty ImagesAs New Zealand’s leader, Jacinda Ardern might have been known for many things on the international stage, but her wardrobe was rarely among them.Yet she always understood that fashion was a political tool — one she wielded so easily and subtly in the service of her agenda that most people didn’t realize it was happening, our chief fashion critic writes.SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAA journalist’s death sends a chillThe journalist Martinez Zogo was found dead this month in Cameroon, his body showing signs of torture. The killing has sent shock waves through West Africa.Zogo was editor in chief of the privately owned radio broadcaster Amplitude FM, and he hosted a hugely popular daily show, Embouteillage (the French word for traffic jam), which regularly exposed corruption. In the weeks before his death, Zogo spoke openly of the death threats he’d received as a result of his investigation into embezzlement at Cameroon’s public institutions.Reporters Without Borders describes Cameroon as having one of the continent’s richest, but also most dangerous, media landscapes. In 2019, the journalist Samuel Ajiekah Abuwe, known as Wazizi, died in police custody. Zogo’s death is emblematic of shrinking press freedom across the region. In Senegal, a prominent investigative reporter, Pape Alé Niang, was released on bail this month after he staged a hunger strike to protest a weekslong detention.As The Times’s West Africa correspondent, Elian Peltier, warns, “Intimidation, detention, deaths, as alarming and important as they are, also hide more structural issues for the press in many West and Central African countries.” Chief among those is a lack of funding and political will to protect reporters. — Lynsey Chutel, Briefings writer based in Johannesburg.PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookArmando Rafael for The New York TimesThese meatballs can be paired with Italian, Mexican or Middle Eastern flavors; their versatility is limitless.What to WatchThe French drama “Full Time” is a portrait of modern labor, centered on a single mother who hits her breaking point.What to Listen toTake a spin through contemporary jazz.Where to GoNew businesses that opened during the pandemic have added flair and fun to Bangkok, an already flamboyant city.MindfulnessStuck in a mental loop of worries that seem to have no end? Here’s what you can do.Now Time to PlayPlay the Mini Crossword, and a clue: Do agricultural work (Four letters).Here are the Wordle and the Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. Have a lovely weekend! — AmeliaP.S. Jason Bailey, who writes about film and TV, watched 651 movies last year. He wrote about picking the best ones.“The Daily” is about Democratic primaries in the U.S.We welcome your thoughts and suggestions about this newsletter. You can reach us at briefing@nytimes.com. More

  • in

    DeSantis’s Efforts to Make Education in Florida Less ‘Woke’

    More from our inbox:‘The Carnage Must Be Stopped’Trump, Still FormidableThe Danger of Anti-Boycott BillsLiving Without Plastic Marta Lavandier/Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “Under Pressure, Board Revises A.P. African American Course” (front page, Feb. 2):It is, of course, sadly ironic that your article about the stripped-down African American course curriculum ran online on the first day of Black History Month.Either Gov. Ron DeSantis genuinely believes that critical thinking, a foundational understanding of how the United States came to be, and the reading of books that deepen kids’ sympathy for other kids will actually mess kids up, or he’s just pandering to the masses.Whether the governor likes it or not, our country’s history, like that of all empires, isn’t wholly pretty. Is it upsetting to learn that the land you live on was taken brutally from its original occupants and that the house you live in was bought with a loan that was denied to another person because of the color of his skin? I would hope so.But the purpose of teaching kids their country’s history isn’t to make them feel bad about themselves personally. If a kid, any kid, comes away from a classroom feeling lousy about themselves, that’s just poor teaching. They should, though, understand that not everyone has had those advantages, be grateful for their good fortune and work to make sure everyone else’s path is equally opportune.Teachers have a tough enough time helping children become empathetic and engaged citizens with the skills and knowledge necessary to thrive in the global community without becoming shuttlecocks in a soulless game of political and cultural badminton.Kevin BarrBethesda, Md.The writer was an English teacher and administrator for over 40 years at Georgetown Day School in Washington.To the Editor:I’m a current high school junior who has taken a number of Advanced Placement courses. The College Board is absolutely spineless for bending to demands from the likes of Gov. Ron DeSantis. As much as he — or anyone else for that matter — might not like the Black Lives Matter movement, there is no way to neglect it in a course that studies the contemporary history and culture of African American people.And, of course, being presented with information doesn’t mean that it will be “indoctrination.”The blatant erasure of Black, queer and feminist scholars from the course is egregious. Nobody deserves to have their experience or perspective left out.At the center of this debate is the student’s right to learn, and I believe that the student’s right to learn trumps all. History isn’t meant to be watered down.Charles YaleOmahaTo the Editor:Gov. Ron DeSantis revealed one of the reasons for his rejection of the A.P. Black history course. “This course on Black history,” he said during a press conference. “What’s one of the lessons about? Queer theory. Now, who would say that an important part of Black history is queer theory?”Who would say that? How about the lesbian poet Audre Lorde? The author James Baldwin? The trans activist Marsha P. Johnson? Barbara Jordan, Bayard Rustin, Alvin Ailey and countless others?These layers of disenfranchisement have a detrimental effect on health equity, justice and more.Donna L. TapelliniLambertville, N.J.‘The Carnage Must Be Stopped’ Pool photo by Andrew NellesTo the Editor:As a Black man and a retired police officer, I have been crying quite a bit lately. Crying from a deep sense of outrage, grief, shame and fear.Outrage, because yet another unarmed Black man has been brutally killed by police officers. In communities of color throughout the United States, police use of deadly force and acts of misconduct and abuse have seemingly grown to epidemic proportions. People of color may now feel victimized by the very people who are supposed to protect them, worrying that they will become one of the ever-growing statistics.Grief, because of the pain that I know Tyre Nichols’s family and friends must now be going through.Shame, because the officers who killed Tyre looked exactly like me. They swore the same oaths that I did to protect and serve the community. They debased and dishonored the badge that they carried.But most of all, fear, because I worry that my grandsons, great-grandsons and sons-in-law may one day become victims of this insanity. I can only pray that they will remember the things I have taught them about how to survive a police encounter, and that they are able to live to fight another day.I know in my heart that Tyre Nichols will not be the last death of a Black man at the hands of police this year.There must be change. There must be accountability. The carnage must be stopped.Charles P. WilsonBeltsville, Md.The writer is webmaster and immediate past chairman of the National Association of Black Law Enforcement Officers.Trump, Still Formidable Eva Marie Uzcategui/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “Trump in ’24? G.O.P. Leaders Aren’t So Sure” (front page, Jan. 27):Lately there have been many reports of Donald Trump’s imminent political demise, but despite the predictions he remains a dangerous opponent and a formidable campaigner.His power has always come not from politicians but from ordinary people who see him as a bigger, more successful version of themselves. However inarticulate he sounds to the rest of us, the message his base hears is always clear.Many of his handpicked candidates lost in 2022 because of their own failings; his appeal to the MAGA base appears undimmed.He is a fighter, with the constitution and mentality of an alligator, striking back ferociously when attacked. He has no regard for the truth, but he has realized that millions of voters don’t either.Certainly none of the sorry bunch of Republicans mentioned in your article have anything like his power on the campaign trail.Tim ShawCambridge, Mass.The Danger of Anti-Boycott Bills Robert NeubeckerTo the Editor:Re “Politicians Push Back on Having E.S.G. Funds,” by Ron Lieber (“Your Money,” Jan. 30):The fight between red states and the asset manager BlackRock is a symptom of a much larger danger facing American democracy today: the attempt by state legislators to take away the right to boycott as a tool for social and political change.The first anti-boycott bill introduced in 2015 to punish Americans boycotting Israel has since been passed in 28 other states. Starting in 2021, Republicans used it as a template to punish companies engaged in environmental, social and governance investing in several states, leading to the current face-off with BlackRock in Texas.Bills introduced earlier this year in South Carolina, Iowa and Missouri follow the same template as the original anti-boycott law punishing boycotts of Israel, but expand the target to punish state contractors that may be engaged in boycotts of companies that do not offer reproductive health care or gender-affirming care and companies that do not meet workplace diversity criteria.From civil rights leaders to farm workers and anti-apartheid activists, Americans have relied on boycotts throughout the country’s history. We are currently at a crossroads where such a crucial tool may no longer be available for future generations.Julia BachaNew YorkThe writer is a filmmaker and director of “Boycott.”Living Without PlasticMust avoid: All of these items, which are part of the reporter’s everyday life, contain plastic.Photographs by Jonah Rosenberg for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Plastic Surgery: No Phone, No Credit Cards, No Bed” (Sunday Styles, Jan. 15):I enjoyed reading your report about living without plastic for 24 hours after taking out my home-delivered Times from its plastic wrapper.David ElsilaGrosse Pointe Park, Mich. More

  • in

    Dads in Government Create the Congressional Dads Caucus

    Male politicians who are parents of young children wearing their fatherhood on their sleeves and their babies on their chests.Several members of Congress, mostly men, held a news conference outside the Capitol last week — a typical sight in Washington. But these men were not just any men: They were dads — men who serve in the U.S. House of Representatives while also raising children. (If “father” is a catchall, “dad” seems to connote a father of young children, too busy even to expend an extra syllable.) The dads were announcing the Congressional Dads Caucus, a group of 20 Democrats aiming to push policies like paid family and medical leave and an expanded child tax credit. Spearheaded by Representative Jimmy Gomez, Democrat of California, who gained attention last month when he voted against Kevin McCarthy for Speaker of the House with his son Hodge, then 4 months, strapped to his chest, the caucus also hopes to speak for a demographic that, in the halls of power, is well represented yet historically has not cast itself as an identity bloc.But times are changing. Fathers in heterosexual partnerships in the United States increasingly wish to split child rearing equitably. (Or, at least, to talk about splitting it: The data shows women still do significantly more. And there is evidence that fathers do more than they used to, but less than they say they do.) Some men, being men, have even managed to turn the dirty work of parenting into an implicit competition: Witness the peacocking dad — catch him in his natural habitat, his own Instagram grid — with a kid on his shoulders and a Boogie Wipes packet in his rear pocket, claiming the duty of caretaking but also its glory.This trend, perhaps most visible in the upscale and progressive milieu that dominates blue states, has flowed into politics. Democrats have pushed to make family leave available to all genders. Pete Buttigieg, a rising star, took several weeks’ parental leave in 2021 from his job as U.S. Secretary of Transportation. Politicians wear their fatherhood on their sleeves and their babies on their chests.“Family leave and affordable child care until very recently were considered women’s issues — ‘the moms are mad about this,’” said Kathryn Jezer-Morton, a parenting columnist for The Cut who wrote her doctoral dissertation on mom influencers. “It’s becoming a family issue, a dad issue. It feels significant.”But a curious lag has opened between societal hopes for dads and baseline expectations. Dads who assume their proper share of parenting and homemaking, according to this emerging worldview, should not accrue psychic bonus points anymore. However, they still do. In 2023, a father feeding his child in the park or touring a prospective school is admired and complimented to a degree a mother is not.“When the dads do or say something, they get the kind of attention I wish we would,” said Representative Rashida Tlaib, Democrat of Michigan, the only woman who is a member of the Dads Caucus — and a mother of two boys, 17 and 11.Spearheaded by Mr. Gomez, the Congressional Dads Caucus is a group of 20 Democrats aiming to push policies like paid family and medical leave and an expanded child tax credit.Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post, via Getty ImagesMs. Tlaib credited Mr. Gomez for pointing out this double standard at last week’s news conference. “He acknowledged that people were like, ‘Wow, this is so great,’” Ms. Tlaib said. “And it’s like, ‘What are you talking about? A lot of us moms have done this.’”For dads, the present state of affairs can be pretty sweet. Who doesn’t want to do 40 percent of the work for 80 percent of the credit? (Especially when it’s good politics.) But being a good ally may mean flaunting fatherhood and exploiting the ease with which fathers can draw attention to parents’ issues while not making it all about them, as men have occasionally been known to do.Because the attention is part of the point. “We know dads exist, but they can bring a spotlight to this issue,” said Gayle Kaufman, a professor of sociology at Davidson College and the author of “Superdads: How Fathers Balance Work and Family in the 21st Century.” “Just being realistic, when men think it’s important, it’s likely to get more attention.”One caucus member, Andy Kim of New Jersey, said that part of the caucus’s project was to shift the automatic association of family concerns away from being “mom” problems. He recalled someone asking his wife if she wished to be a stay-at-home mother, when it was in fact he who used comp time and then left his job at the State Department in order to care for their first of two sons, who are now 7 and 5. “She said, ‘You should talk to my husband,’” he said. The Dads Caucus’s inciting incident illustrated how novel it felt to see a dad dadding hard in Washington. Like many Congressional mothers and fathers, Mr. Gomez brought his family to Washington for his swearing-in ceremony, which typically would have followed a pro forma vote for the House Speaker. But this year, the body required an extraordinary 15 ballots over five days to select Mr. McCarthy. Families stayed in town; babies fussed.During an early voting round, Mr. Gomez and his wife, Mary Hodge (for whom Hodge Gomez is named — Ms. Hodge rejected a hyphenated last name, Mr. Gomez said), decided in the Democratic cloakroom to strap Hodge into a chest carrier to calm him. Which is how the 48-year-old congressman came to stride the House floor and cast his vote, as he put it then, “on behalf of my son, Hodge, and all the working families,” while Hodge politely squirmed and received a coochie-coo tickle from Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Ms. Hodge, who is the deputy mayor of city services in Los Angeles, returned to the West Coast before the voting marathon was complete. Hodge stayed with Mr. Gomez, who tweeted myriad baby shots. Mr. Gomez said in an interview that a mother in the identical situation likely would not have received such glowing coverage, like a “CBS Weekend News” feature with the caption “Congressman Pulls Double Duty.”“The praise I was getting for doing what any mother would do was out of proportion,” he said, adding, “if a woman did that, people would question her commitment to her job.”Mr. Gomez said the caucus had been formed with only Democrats in order to get it off the ground, given the disagreements between Democrats and Republicans over many economic family policies (to say nothing of related ones like abortion).Patrick T. Brown, a fellow at the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center who studies family economics, said some Republicans — he cited Senators Mitt Romney and J.D. Vance, among others — might co-sign some Democratic economic proposals for families. “There’s a growing recognition that not all the pressures facing families are cultural in nature,” Mr. Brown said. “It’s not all Hollywood elites making family life harder, it’s the pressures of the modern economy. If you’re concerned about people getting married later or not having kids, you need to orient policy in a more pro-family direction.”The caucus has already called for expanding child care access and universal family medical leave. But its most immediate achievement may be its members’ open reckoning with how prevailing conversations about care-taking shortchange everyone. Mothers are often ignored for what they do and made to feel guilt‌y for what they don’t. Fathers are frustrated by the limited public imagination for what they can do and evince a palpable, wistful anxiety of influence when speaking about motherhood. (“We talk about our kids like any moms do,” said Dan Goldman, a Caucus member and father of five who was elected to Congress from the Brooklyn district that includes the dad stronghold Park Slope.)Last year, before founding the Dads Caucus, Mr. Gomez went so far as to join the Congressional Mamas Caucus. “I had always advocated for all these issues,” he said.Because yes, of course, the Mamas Caucus — founded by Ms. Tlaib to push for many of the same policies the Dads Caucus backs — predates the Dads Caucus by several months.No matter: Ms. Tlaib was equanimous.“If it took Jimmy Gomez starting a Dads Caucus to get The New York Times to call me to talk about the Mamas Caucus,” she said, “then I’m all in.” More