More stories

  • in

    Macron’s Comments on Algeria Resonate as Elections Loom

    The French president acknowledged the suffering of colonists who fled Algeria after the war of independence, a group that has long voted heavily in favor of the right in France.PARIS — President Emmanuel Macron of France, addressing a community that has been fertile ground for the far right ahead of presidential elections this spring, on Wednesday acknowledged the suffering of the French and European colonists who fled Algeria after the 1954-62 war of independence and of their descendants.“The 1962 exodus is a tragic page of our national history,” he said, adding that the colonists and their descendants “were not listened to” and “were not welcomed with the affection that every French citizen deserves.”Mr. Macron’s speech was the latest step in a yearlong effort to resolve painful memories of France’s colonial past in Algeria. Following proposals made in a government-commissioned report, he acknowledged crimes committed by the French military and police and the state’s lack of regard for those who fled Algeria and had fought for France.But it also came as Mr. Macron enters the final stretch of a bruising campaign to serve a second five-year term in which his government has moved increasingly to the right on issues prominent in far-right campaigning such as immigration and the place of Islam in France.People fleeing Algeria on a boat, waiting to be taken back to France in 1962.Gamma-Keystone, via Getty ImagesOver the past year, Mr. Macron has recognized the suffering of nearly every community affected by France’s colonial history in Algeria, including independence fighters and immigrants, and Algerians who fought on the French side during the war of independence.“He achieved in six months what had not been done for 60 years,” said Benjamin Stora, a leading historian of the Algerian War and the author of the government-commissioned report.But Mr. Macron’s speech Wednesday recognizing the suffering of the colonists, known as Pieds-Noirs, and their descendants, was notable for its timing three months before an election in a political environment marked by heated debates over immigration and Islam that have echoes of the French colonial past in Algeria.Mr. Macron, right, received the report on colonization and the Algerian war from the historian Benjamin Stora in 2021.Pool photo by Christian HartmannThe trauma of that history continues to shape modern France, with nostalgia on the right and resentment among the country’s large Muslim population.The long shadow of France’s defeat in Algeria looms large in the rhetoric of Éric Zemmour, a far-right candidate for president whose parents left the country in the 1950s and who speaks of “reconquering” a France he says is being colonized by Islam and immigration. His message has resonated with many voters on the far right, leading to a jump in the polls last year that has gradually dissipated in recent months as Mr. Zemmour has struggled to broaden his base of support and attract working-class voters.Mr. Macron last year started addressing the recommendations in the Stora report by acknowledging the brutal killing of a leading Algerian lawyer, Ali Boumendjel, by French soldiers. He also facilitated access to sensitive archives of the Algerian War and was the first French head of state to commemorate the mass killing of Algerian independence protesters by the Paris police 60 years ago.The moves were widely criticized by the French right, which is still reluctant to openly criticize colonization, particularly the party of the far-right leader Marine Le Pen, the National Rally, whose origins are rooted in popular opposition to the end of colonial Algeria.France’s National Archives near Paris. Mr. Macron facilitated access to sensitive archives of the Algerian War.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesMr. Macron then asked “forgiveness” for the abandonment of Harkis, Algerians who fought for France during the war and have often shown strong support for Ms. Le Pen, his main challenger in the presidential elections in April.The Pieds-Noirs emigrated to Algeria from France and European countries, often as laborers and farmers, while the nation was under French rule, for about 130 years. After Algeria won its independence in 1962, about 800,000 of the colonists fled to France and many others who stayed were massacred. Their fate has long fueled resentment, and nostalgia for the colonial past, feelings that have often translated into support for the far right.In 2017, while campaigning for the French presidency, Mr. Macron called the colonization of Algeria a “crime against humanity,” infuriating Pied-Noir organizations. His words on Wednesday struck a very different tone.French troops in Algiers in 1956.Associated PressFrench paratroopers questioning a captive in Saint Eugene, Algeria, in 1957.Jacques Grevin/Agence France-Presse, via IntercontinentaleResponding to one of the main demands of the Pieds-Noirs, Mr. Macron officially recognized that French soldiers in March 1962 killed dozens of supporters of French Algeria. He also called for the mass killing of Pieds-Noirs by Algerian independence supporters to be “faced and recognized.”Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionCard 1 of 6The campaign begins. More

  • in

    Hochul Amassed a Campaign Fortune. Here's Who it Came From.

    Gov. Kathy Hochul’s record-setting $21.6 million in donations flowed from a who’s who of New York’s special interests.Last November, when many of Manhattan’s skyscrapers sat half-empty, Gov. Kathy Hochul made a high-stakes wager on New York City’s commercial real estate industry: She vowed to move ahead with a marquee plan to restore Pennsylvania Station and erect new office towers around it.For Manhattan’s mega-rich real estate developers, the announcement signaled Ms. Hochul’s support for the kind of grand projects that foretell a windfall, and some found a concrete way of showing their approval to the new governor.In the weeks that followed, Ms. Hochul’s campaign received checks for $69,700, the legal limit, from some of the city’s biggest real estate executives, including Steven Roth of Vornado Realty Trust, which is positioned to directly benefit from the project that he once called a “Promised Land.” Other checks trickled in from developers, builders, engineers and even some who opposed it.The campaign contributions flowed from a broader spigot of cash turned on last fall by New York’s varied special interests, from real estate and building trades to hospitals, labor unions and gaming companies, directed toward Ms. Hochul’s election campaign.The donations included $200,000 in checks from the family behind a major construction firm with millions in state contracts, $47,000 that was tied to a gaming giant leaning on the state to expand legal gambling, and $41,000 traced back to a single Albany lobbyist.The funds helped Ms. Hochul, a moderate Democrat who unexpectedly ascended to office last August, assemble a record-setting $21.6 million war chest, and claim a steep advantage heading into June’s Democratic primary and November’s general election.People and industries with financial interests before the state have long been reliable donors to top elected officials, showering them with money that, at times, can pose ethical and legal problems.There has been no evidence that the contributions from Mr. Roth and other developers were directly related to Ms. Hochul’s Penn Station plan, but those and others may still prompt scrutiny about her decision-making as she negotiates the state’s $216 billion budget.“It’s not like this isn’t a problem, but it is a well-trod path,” said Blair Horner, the executive director of the New York Public Interest Research Group, which pushes for tighter campaign finance laws. “She’s just running through it instead of walking.”More than 95 percent of the funds she collected came from donors who gave $1,000 or more, according to a review of publicly available campaign filings, despite the Hochul campaign’s claims of success in pulling in small donations. Dozens of people wrote the governor checks for the legal maximum.Jerrel Harvey, a spokesman for Ms. Hochul’s campaign, pointed to contributions from every county in the state and said that the campaign was proud that her agenda “has resonated with a diverse coalition of supporters.”“In keeping with the governor’s commitment to maintain high ethical standards, campaign contributions have no influence on government decisions,” he said.Many of her donors are fixtures in New York politics and were stalwart supporters of her predecessor, Andrew M. Cuomo, who collected tens of millions of dollars in campaign contributions by often using the same tactics Ms. Hochul is employing. But where Mr. Cuomo had years to build those relationships and fill his campaign coffers, Ms. Hochul has done so in a matter on months.Few industries gave more — and frequently in large amounts — than real estate, where large developers are keenly watching how Ms. Hochul will not only approach large, state-funded capital projects but the future of the state’s affordable housing law.Douglas Durst, who oversees a multibillion dollar real estate empire and chairs the influential Real Estate Board of New York, gave her $55,000. The family of Scott Rechler, a top donor to Mr. Cuomo whose RXR Realty controls millions of square feet of commercial real estate, gave $60,000. Members of the Rudin, Tishman and Speyer families — whose names dot buildings across the city — collectively contributed more than $400,000. Top executives at Related Companies, the group behind Hudson Yards, maxed out.The new governor, who has cast herself as pro-business and greenlighted a rash of expensive capital projects amid an influx of federal funds, also quickly began collecting funds from the state’s construction industry. Hundreds of thousands of dollars came from unions, trade groups and executives representing bricklayers, sheet metal workers, engineers, elevator constructors, machine operators, construction companies and even a law firm that specializes in construction accidents.Hospitals, nursing homes and other health groups, who scored significant victories in Ms. Hochul’s budget, including retention bonuses for frontline health workers, gave hundreds of thousands of dollars, as well. Over two days in October and December, for example, more than 60 LLCs associated with nursing or rehabilitation homes all gave $1,000 or more apiece.Three family members associated with the Haugland Group, a Long Island construction and energy firm with lucrative state contracts at Kennedy Airport and with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, gave more than $200,000 altogether.A Guide to the New York Governor’s RaceCard 1 of 5A crowded field. More

  • in

    Ingrid Betancourt se postula a la presidencia de Colombia

    El anuncio de su candidatura llega en un momento crítico: los colombianos están hartos de la clase política y el futuro del acuerdo de paz está en riesgo.BOGOTÁ — Ingrid Betancourt, excongresista y quien fue mantenida como rehén por la guerrilla y llegó a simbolizar tanto la brutalidad del largo conflicto en Colombia como de los esfuerzos de reconciliación del país, se postulará a la presidencia, dijo el martes.Betancourt entra en una campaña presidencial muy abierta en un momento en el que Colombia está en una determinante encrucijada política y social.Cuando fue secuestrada hace 20 años, Betancourt estaba haciendo campaña para el mismo cargo. Ahora, dijo, el país se enfrenta al mismo “sistema corrupto” y “maquinarias politiqueras” que ella combatió entonces.“Hoy estoy aquí para terminar lo que empecé”, dijo en un estrado en un hotel del centro de Bogotá, la capital del país, acompañada por sus aliados.Betancourt, quien fue capturada en 2002 y retenida durante más de seis años por la mayor fuerza guerrillera del país, las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, anunció su candidatura a las elecciones de mayo mientras el país enfrenta enormes desafíos.Tras más de 50 años de guerra, el gobierno y el grupo rebelde, conocido como las Farc, firmaron un acuerdo de paz en 2016. Pero, desde entonces, una oleada de otros grupos armados ha irrumpido en el vacío y seguido combatiendo.La violencia ha aumentado en algunas zonas rurales y los críticos han culpado al gobierno por no invertir lo suficiente para abordar la desigualdad y la pobreza que han contribuido a impusar la guerra, como se había comprometido a hacer en el acuerdo de paz.Muchos colombianos están hartos del statu quo político, un sentimiento que estalló en la esfera pública en mayo del año pasado, cuando miles de personas salieron a las calles durante más de un mes para protestar por las penurias que solo empeoraron con la pandemia.Tras sus años de cautiverio —en los que a veces estuvo encadenada— Betancourt ha apoyado el proceso de paz y también ha criticado a las Farc, convirtiéndose en un símbolo de los intentos nacionales de reconocer los costos de la guerra, pero también de superarla.Sergio Guzmán, un analista de Bogotá, llamó a Betancourt la “candidata de la reconciliación” del país.En una entrevista con el Times el año pasado, Betancourt calificó el acuerdo de paz como “una ventana, una oportunidad generacional, de salir de la locura violenta en la cual hemos vivido toda nuestra vida”.La cuestión, dijo Guzmán, es si eso es lo que quieren los colombianos.“Todas nuestras elecciones han sido miedo, esperanza y odio”, continuó. “Ninguna elección se ha disputado sobre la base de la compasión y la reconciliación”.Hay un descontento generalizado con el actual presidente, Iván Duque, quien es un producto del poder político tradicional de derecha del país, mientras que un populista de izquierda, Gustavo Petro, lidera las encuestas en medio de una ola izquierdista y opuesta a quienes están en el poder que se extiende por América Latina.“¿Puede Ingrid convertirse en un bálsamo para esas emociones negativas predominantes que estamos sintiendo en este momento?”, dijo Guzmán. “No lo sé. Esa es una de las cosas que nos va a decir su candidatura”.Pero para ganar impulso entre los votantes, dijo, “tiene que vender la idea de que la reconciliación es mejor que el populismo”.Aunque Betancourt es ampliamente conocida en todo el país, una victoria en mayo no es ni mucho menos segura.Para llegar a las elecciones de mayo, Betancourt tendría que ganar las primarias de marzo, en las que competiría con otros candidatos de centroNathalia Angarita para The New York TimesEn este momento hay más de 20 aspirantes a la presidencia, y la mayoría de los más conocidos se agrupan en tres coaliciones: una de izquierda, encabezada por Petro; una de centro, a la que se une Betancourt; y una de derecha, cuyos miembros se consideran los abanderados del gobierno actual.Para llegar a las elecciones de mayo, Betancourt tendría que ganar las primarias de marzo, en las que competiría con otros candidatos de centro, como Alejandro Gaviria, exministro de Salud y hasta hace poco rector de una prestigiosa universidad.Guzmán señaló que Betancourt se incorporó a la campaña tarde en el calendario electoral y calificó su candidatura como “una medida desesperada”.Colombia nunca ha tenido una mujer en la presidencia, y Betancourt es una de las cuatro candidatas de las tres principales coaliciones.La candidata más destacada hasta el momento ha sido Francia Márquez, una joven política afrocolombiana y activista medioambiental que también es víctima de la guerra.Márquez, quien se ha unido a la coalición de la izquierda, se ha distinguido no solo por su identidad —la política colombiana ha estado dominada por hombres blancos y ricos—, sino por su franca adhesión a la política feminista y su disposición a criticar a Petro.Betancourt es hija de una política y de un político y diplomático colombianos, y posteriormente obtuvo la nacionalidad francesa a través de su primer marido.En 2002, tras su paso por el Congreso, Betancourt se lanzó a la campaña presidencial como integrante del Partido Verde Oxígeno, un movimiento político joven de filosofía pacifista, ecologista y anticorrupción. El 23 de febrero de 2002, cuando se dirigía a un acto de campaña en la ciudad de San Vicente del Caguán, fue detenida en un control de carretera y tomada como rehén por las Farc.Durante sus años de cautiverio en la selva, fue tratada brutalmente e intentó escapar en repetidas ocasiones, experiencias que relató en su libro No hay silencio que no termine.Fue rescatada por el gobierno colombiano y, con los años, se ha convertido en la víctima más conocida del país. Pero también ha sido objeto de críticas: de quienes dicen que ha restado atención a víctimas más pobres y menos conocidas, y de otros que la han criticado por pedir una indemnización al gobierno colombiano tras su cautiverio y rescate.Betancourt vive desde hace años en Francia y regresó a Colombia hace apenas unos meses. En su discurso de campaña, se refirió directamente a las críticas de que el traslado estaba diseñado para obtener un beneficio político personal.“He vuelto en busca del mayor beneficio político”, dijo, “que todos tengamos una verdadera democracia”.El anuncio de su campaña no dice mucho sobre sus propuestas políticas, más allá de las repetidas promesas de luchar contra la corrupción y de abordar el impacto de la violencia en el país.“Mi historia es la historia de todos los colombianos”, dijo.En un país de más de 50 millones de habitantes, nueve millones están registrados en el gobierno como víctimas del conflicto.“Mientras las Farc nos esclavizaba a mí y a mis compañeros, los cárteles de la droga, los violentos y los políticos corruptos han estado esclavizando a cada uno de ustedes”, continuó.“Vamos a salir de esta cultura mafiosa, mentirosa, violenta y vamos a aprender de nuevo a ser ciudadanos libres”.Sofía Villamil More

  • in

    Ingrid Betancourt to Make a Bid for President of Colombia

    Ingrid Betancourt’s candidacy comes at a critical time, when Colombians are fed up with the political establishment and the future of the peace agreement is at stake.BOGOTÁ, Colombia — Ingrid Betancourt, a former congresswoman and one-time guerrilla hostage who has come to symbolize both the brutality of Colombia’s long war and the country’s efforts at reconciliation, will run for president, she said Tuesday.Ms. Betancourt enters a wide open race at a time when Colombia is at a critical political and social crossroads.When she was kidnapped 20 years ago, Ms. Betancourt was campaigning for the same office. Now, she said, the country is facing the same “corrupt system” and “political machinery” that she had fought back then.“Today I am here to finish what I started,” she said, standing on a stage at a hotel in downtown Bogotá, the country’s capital, flanked by allies. Ms. Betancourt, who was captured in 2002 and held by the country’s largest guerrilla force, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, for more than six years, announced her bid for the May election with the country facing enormous challenges.Following more than 50 years of war, the government and the rebel group, known as the FARC, signed a peace deal in 2016. But since then, a swell of other armed groups have swept into the vacuum and continued to fight.Violence has surged in parts of the countryside — and critics have faulted the government for not investing enough to address the inequality and poverty that had helped fuel the war, as it had committed to doing in the peace deal.Many in Colombia are fed up with the political status quo, a sentiment that burst into the public sphere last May, when thousands took to the streets for more than a month to protest hardship that was only made worse by the pandemic.Following her years in captivity — when she was sometimes held in chains — Ms. Betancourt has both supported the peace process and criticized the FARC, emerging as a symbol of national attempts to acknowledge the costs of the war, but also to move beyond it.Sergio Guzmán, an analyst in Bogotá, called Ms. Betancourt the country’s “reconciliation candidate.”In an interview with The Times last year, Ms. Betancourt called the peace deal “a window — a generational opportunity — to leave behind the insane violence we have lived in all our lives.”The question, Mr. Guzmán said, is whether that’s what Colombians want.“All our elections have been fear and hope and hate,” he went on. “No election has really been fought on compassion and reconciliation.”There is widespread discontent with the current president, Iván Duque, who is a product of the country’s right-wing political establishment, while a left-wing populist, Gustavo Petro, is leading in the polls amid a leftist, anti-incumbent wave that is sweeping Latin America.“Can Ingrid become a balm to those prevailing negative emotions that we’re feeling right now?” Mr. Guzmán said. “I don’t know. That’s one of the things that her candidacy is going to tell us.”But to make any headway among voters, he said, “she needs to sell the idea that reconciliation is better than populism.”While Ms. Betancourt is widely known throughout the country, a win in May is far from certain.To even get to the May election, Ms. Betancourt would first have to win the March primary, in which she will compete against other centrists.Nathalia Angarita for The New York TimesToday, there are more than 20 candidates for the presidency, with most of the best-known candidates grouped into three coalitions: a coalition on the left, headed by Mr. Petro; a coalition in the center, which Ms. Betancourt is joining; and a coalition on the right, whose members are seen as the torchbearers for the current government.To even get to the May election, Ms. Betancourt would first have to win the March primary, in which she will compete against others in the center, including Alejandro Gaviria, a former health minister and recent head of a prestigious university.Mr. Guzmán pointed out that Ms. Betancourt joined the race late in the electoral calendar and called her bid “a Hail Mary.”Colombia has never had a woman president, and Ms. Betancourt is one of just four women candidates in the three leading coalitions.The most prominent female candidate to this point has been Francia Márquez, a young, Afro-Colombian politician and environmental activist who is also a victim of the war.Ms. Márquez, who has joined the coalition on the left, has distinguished herself not only because of her identity — Colombian politics has been dominated by wealthy white men — but because of her outspoken embrace of feminist politics and willingness to criticize Mr. Petro.Ms. Betancourt is the daughter of a Colombian politician and a Colombian diplomat, and later became a French citizen through her first husband.In 2002, following time in Congress, Ms. Betancourt launched a campaign for presidency as a member of the Partido Verde Oxígeno, a young political movement with a pacificist, environmental, anti-corruption philosophy. On Feb. 23, 2002, she was traveling to a campaign event in the city of San Vicente del Caguán, when she was stopped at a roadblock and taken hostage by the FARC.During her years in captivity in the jungle, she was treated brutally and tried to escape repeatedly, experiences she recounted in her book “Even Silence Has An End.”She was eventually rescued by the Colombian government, and over the years she has emerged as the country’s best-known victim. But she has also been the subject of criticism — from those who say she has taken attention away from poorer, lesser known victims, and from others who have criticized her for seeking compensation from the Colombian government following her captivity and rescue.Ms. Betancourt has lived in France for years and returned to Colombia just months ago. In her campaign speech, she directly addressed criticism that the move was designed for personal political benefit.“I have returned in search of the highest political benefit,” she said, “that all of us can have a true democracy.”Her campaign announcement said little about policy proposals beyond repeated vows to fight corruption — and to address the impact of violence on the country.“My story is the story of all Colombians,” she said.In a country of more than 50 million people, nine million are registered with the government as conflict victims.“While the FARC enslaved me and my companions, the drug cartels, violent groups and corrupt politicians enslaved each of you,” she went on.“We are going to leave behind this culture of mafias, violence and lies, and we are going to learn again to be free citizens.”Sofía Villamil More

  • in

    Hochul Outpaces Foes by Raising Record-High $21.6 Million for Campaign

    The fund-raising haul positions Gov. Kathy Hochul, who leads her rivals in polls, as a prohibitive favorite to win her first full term as governor of New York in November.Five months after ascending to New York’s highest office, Gov. Kathy Hochul plans to submit filings on Tuesday that show her election campaign has already raised nearly $21.6 million, a record-smashing sum that positions her as the prohibitive favorite to win a full term as governor this fall, and likely the most dominant figure in New York State politics.The filings were expected to show that Ms. Hochul, a Democrat from Buffalo who is the first woman to lead the state, took in roughly $140,000 per day, on average, between her swearing-in last August and last week. She has more than $21 million in cash on hand, according to her campaign.Ms. Hochul’s fund-raising strength has already helped drive her most competitive foil, Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, from the race entirely, and likely played a role in the decision by Bill de Blasio, the former New York City mayor, to announce Tuesday morning that he would forgo a run for governor after months of flirting with it.But the source of some of her donations may also prove to be a liability for Ms. Hochul, complicating the image of a governor who took office in the shadow of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s sexual harassment scandal with a pledge to enact ethics reforms and bring about “a new era of transparency” in Albany.Behind the stunning sums are expected to be a cast of New York’s most well-financed special interest groups, in many cases the same multimillionaires, labor unions and business groups whose checks have bankrolled Democratic politicians, including Mr. Cuomo, for decades and pulled some of them into an ethical morass.Albany lobbying firms jockeyed to hold private fund-raisers for the governor within weeks of her taking office, and have steered clients with business before the state to do the same. Many of the state’s largest landlords have cut five-figure checks. So have builders reliant on massive state-funded infrastructure projects.As if to underscore the threat, the campaign finance reports were due the same day that Ms. Hochul plans to reveal her first budget as governor, a plan that is expected to swell to around $200 billion and include proposals sought by politically active hospitals, the state’s largest health care union, and even the trade group representing liquor stores.A poll of the race released by Siena College on Tuesday showed Ms. Hochul with a commanding lead ahead of June’s Democratic primary and relatively strong reviews from voters for her attempts to overhaul the governor’s office, jump-start New York’s lagging economic recovery, and manage a resurgent outbreak of the coronavirus.Forty-six percent of Democrats said that they would support Ms. Hochul in the primary, compared to 11 percent who said they would back Jumaane Williams, the city’s left-leaning public advocate, and just six percent who said they would support Representative Thomas Suozzi, a Long Island moderate. Twelve percent had said they would support Mr. de Blasio, a progressive with eight years’ worth of experience running the nation’s largest city, before he announced that he would not run.Mr. Williams had not yet disclosed his fund-raising figures as of Tuesday morning. But Mr. Suozzi, who is aggressively challenging Ms. Hochul from her right flank, plans to report on Tuesday that he raised more than $3 million since entering the race in November, and transferred another $2 million from his congressional campaign account, according to Kim Devlin, his senior adviser.Though he trails in the polls, the funds indicated that Mr. Suozzi would have the resources he needs to mount a primary challenge in the near term, and his campaign said it was prepared to announce a slew of new hires.And Republicans, benefiting from a national backlash against Democrats, believe they have a shot at winning a statewide race — something they have not done in New York since 2002.Representative Lee Zeldin, a Long Island Republican, appears to be his party’s current front-runner and was expected to announce a multimillion fund-raising haul on Tuesday. He is competing against Rob Astorino, a former Westchester County executive, and Andrew Giuliani, the son of Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor.The candidates, and any political groups supporting them financially, are required to file a detailed list of their contributions and expenditures with the state’s Board of Elections by the end of Tuesday. Several campaigns, like Ms. Hochul’s, previewed top-line numbers before submitting the paperwork, making it difficult to assess where their money was coming from or how it was being spent.A Guide to the New York Governor’s RaceCard 1 of 5A crowded field. More

  • in

    Bill de Blasio Says He Won’t Run for Governor After All

    Mr. de Blasio, the former New York City mayor, had signaled for months that he planned to run for governor, but he faced long odds in a crowded Democratic primary.Bill de Blasio, the former mayor of New York City, said on Tuesday that he would not run for governor of New York, as he had been widely expected to do.Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat who served two terms in office, had signaled for months that he was planning a campaign, saying repeatedly that he did not feel ready to leave public service.He made the announcement in a video posted on Twitter, highlighting the accomplishments of his mayoral tenure before announcing that he would not be joining the governor’s race.“No, I am not going to be running for governor in New York State,” Mr. de Blasio said, standing on the street outside his Brooklyn residence. “But I am going to devote every fiber of my being to fight inequality in the state of New York.”Mr. de Blasio then hinted that he would have more to say about his future in the coming days.He declined to enter a crowded Democratic primary field, with the incumbent, Gov. Kathy Hochul, facing challenges from Jumaane D. Williams, the city’s public advocate, and Representative Tom Suozzi of Long Island.A Siena College poll released earlier on Tuesday showed Ms. Hochul with a significant lead over her competitors and potential competitors, including Mr. de Blasio. She earned the support of 46 percent of Democrats polled, while Mr. de Blasio had 12 percent, Mr. Williams had 11 percent and Mr. Suozzi had 6 percent. Across party lines, 45 percent of voters polled said they viewed Ms. Hochul favorably. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. Ms. Hochul has also outpaced her competitors in fund-raising, having raised a record-breaking $21.6 million so far.For months, Mr. de Blasio had signaled that he would run. He appeared on MSNBC frequently and promoted a statewide education plan. He was also sounding out trusted former aides about joining a campaign, and he made overtures to labor leaders.Mr. de Blasio had said that he was not deterred by polls that showed him badly trailing his rivals.“I have a long, rich history of being an underdog,” he said.New York City mayors have had a difficult time attaining higher office. The last one to do so was John T. Hoffman, who was elected governor in 1868. Many mayors have run for president, including John V. Lindsay in 1972 and, more recently, Michael R. Bloomberg and Mr. de Blasio himself.Mr. de Blasio had planned to focus on his popular universal prekindergarten policy, his handling of the pandemic and his focus on aggressive vaccine mandates. He also used his final weeks in office to argue that he had reduced inequality, which he set out to do when he was elected in 2013 on a message that he would address the imbalance that had led to a “tale of two cities.”In his video on Tuesday, Mr. de Blasio also acknowledged some of his less popular moments as mayor, including accidentally killing a groundhog and driving out of his way to visit his preferred gym in Park Slope.“Now I made my fair share of mistakes,” Mr. de Blasio said. “I was not good with groundhogs at all. I probably shouldn’t have gone to the gym. But you know what, we changed things in this town.” More

  • in

    Roberta Metsola Elected as President of European Parliament

    Roberta Metsola of Malta will succeed David Sassoli, an Italian politician who died last week, at a critical time for the institution.BRUSSELS — The European Parliament elected a new president on Tuesday, with Roberta Metsola, a 43-year-old Maltese deputy, picked to lead the institution as its seeks to gain a more prominent place in the E.U. power structure.Ms. Metsola’s predecessor, David Sassoli, died at age 65 last week, and she was selected by an overwhelming majority over two other candidates, all women.The European Union of 27 nations, one of the world’s most ambitious political experiments, is home to 450 million people. The Parliament is the bloc’s only directly elected institution, and voters have been electing lawmakers to the body since 1979, when the union was much smaller.Despite the holding of European Parliament elections every five years, the European Union has a complicated structure and is often accused of being a murky bureaucratic machine, detached from its citizens and lacking democratic accountability, even as it grows in power.“In the next years, people across Europe will look to our institution for leadership and direction, while others will continue to test the limits of our democratic values and European principles,” Ms. Metsola told lawmakers after being elected. “We must fight back against the anti-E.U. narrative that takes hold so easily and so quickly.”Ms. Metsola, a member of the conservative European People’s Party, the Parliament’s largest political group, has a daunting task in leading the most fragmented chamber in decades as it tackles issues such as curbing carbon emissions, upholding the rule of law and setting out rules for major technology companies.European Parliament in 2020. It is the bloc’s only directly elected institution.Sebastien Bozon/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesShe will also have to navigate the Parliament’s relationship with the two other institutions governing the bloc: the European Commission, its executive bureaucracy; and the European Council, which pools together the heads of government of the 27 member states. The three branches often compete with one another for influence, with the Parliament struggling for relevance and usually coming out the weakest.The dance between the E.U. institutions has been unfolding against the backdrop of a larger conundrum: Can the bloc, which has positioned itself as a defender of democracy and which governs many aspects of the lives of Europeans, become more democratic while maintaining its current structure?“The European Union is an unfinished political system,” said Sophie Pornschlegel, a senior policy analyst at the European Policy Center, a Brussels-based think tank. “It’s a question of perspective,” she noted. “If you look at it like an international organization, it is one of the most democratic ones. Obviously, if you compare it to national democracies, it has a democratic deficit.”But according to Ms. Pornschlegel, that comparison would not be fair. “So far, we don’t have the United States of Europe,” she said, referring to a more deeply integrated federal power structure. “It’s much more complicated than that.”The European Parliament can veto legislation, set up budgets, ratify international agreements and has a supervisory role over various institutions. It also has the final say in approving the president of the European Commission.But in December 2019, when the current head of the commission, Ursula von der Leyen, was appointed, national leaders reneged on their promise to nominate a president from candidates proposed by the Parliament’s lawmakers, which was seen as a major blow to the institution’s standing. Lawmakers also cannot dismiss individual commissioners, but can only disband the commission as a whole.The European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, second left, was appointed in 2019.Pool photo by Aris OikonomouAnd in an important divergence from national legislatures, the European Parliament does not have the power to initiate laws, which many see as a huge hindrance. “It puts you in a reactive mode,” said Marietje Schaake, a former member of the European Parliament who now teaches at Stanford University. “It is a major flaw in the design of the union.”Alberto Alemanno, a professor of European Union law at the business school HEC Paris, put it more bluntly. “The European Parliament is neither a parliament, because it has no legislative initiative, nor is it European, because its members are elected at the national and not at the European level,” he said.But analysts say that in recent years the Parliament has gained prominence, expressed both through an increased turnout in the 2019 elections and through a series of unusually bold moves.Under Mr. Sassoli, an Italian, the Parliament took the European Commission to court for not using existing rules to cut funding for member countries breaching rule-of-law standards. And in May, lawmakers blocked a high-profile investment agreement between the bloc and China, citing human rights violations and sanctions against Europeans critical of Beijing, including some lawmakers.As the position of the Parliament has evolved, so has the role of its president. “It is no longer the role of a ceremonial figure, like the president of the German republic,” Professor Alemanno said. “The president is somebody who can allow the European Parliament to advance their political goals and defend its prerogatives. But it will depend on their personality, and their political affiliation.”In many ways, Ms. Metsola, a former lawyer, brings novelty to the role. Nearly 60 percent of the legislators are men, and the average age is about 50. And Ms. Metsola is the first president to come from Malta, the bloc’s smallest member nation.But in other ways, Ms. Metsola is a mainstream choice. She belongs to the Parliament’s dominant group, which is also home to the party of Ms. von der Leyen. Critics say that the political affinity could be an obstacle to Ms. Metsola’s standing up to the commission.Ms. Metsola belongs to the Parliament’s dominant group, which is also home to the party of Ms. von der Leyen.Gonzalo Fuentes/ReutersIn an interview with The Times before her selection as president, Ms. Metsola said, “We have the task to hold the commission to account, and we will keep doing that unapologetically.”“But we will keep in mind the bigger picture of E.U. unity,” she added. “I don’t want the Parliament to get stuck in inter-institutional debates.”Ms. Metsola has been outspoken against corruption and the erosion of the rule of law, especially in her native Malta. But she has faced criticism over her socially conservative views, in particular her stance against abortion. She said that once elected, she would push forward “the position of the house” on reproductive rights.Referring to Ms. Metsola’s vote against a resolution condemning Poland’s anti-abortion laws, Alice Kuhnke, a Green candidate for president, said, “All women in the E.U. should rely on the president of the Parliament to fight for us when needed.”“I find it hard to see how she would manage to do that with credibility and strength,” Ms. Kuhnke added, in an interview before Ms. Metsola was confirmed as president.The institution of the Parliament has often been chided for not upholding the principles it preaches. Transparency International, an anticorruption watchdog, said in a recent report that the Parliament’s internal rules were not sufficient to guarantee accountability of lawmakers. Despite the systemic flaws, there are reasons for the Parliament to be optimistic, analysts say. In a recent poll, 63 percent of Europeans said that they would like the body to play a more important role. One proposal would see some lawmakers elected from Pan-European rather than national lists, aiming to bolster the connection with voters across the bloc. But in typical E.U. fashion, it is unclear whether such a change would be ready before the next election, planned for 2024. More

  • in

    Eastern Europe Tests New Forms of Media Censorship

    With new, less repressive tactics, countries like Serbia, Poland and Hungary are deploying highly effective tools to skew public opinion.BELGRADE, Serbia — When Covid-19 reached Eastern Europe in the spring of 2020, a Serbian journalist reported a severe shortage of masks and other protective equipment. She was swiftly arrested, thrown in a windowless cell and charged with inciting panic.The journalist, Ana Lalic, was quickly released and even got a public apology from the government in what seemed like a small victory against old-style repression by Serbia’s authoritarian president, Aleksandar Vucic.But Ms. Lalic was then vilified for weeks as a traitor by much of the country’s news media, which has come increasingly under the control of Mr. Vucic and his allies as Serbia adopts tactics favored by Hungary and other states now in retreat from democracy across Europe’s formerly communist eastern fringe.“For the whole nation, I became a public enemy,” she recalled.Serbia no longer jails or kills critical journalists, as happened under the rule of Slobodan Milosevic in the 1990s. It now seeks to destroy their credibility and ensure few people see their reports.The muting of critical voices has greatly helped Mr. Vucic — and also the country’s most well-known athlete, the tennis star Novak Djokovic, whose visa travails in Australia have been portrayed as an intolerable affront to the Serb nation. The few remaining outlets of the independent news media mostly support him but take a more balanced approach.Ana Lalic, a Serbian journalist, last month in Belgrade. She was arrested in 2020 after reporting on a severe shortage of masks and other protective equipment that could be used against the coronavirus.Marko Risovic for The New York TimesAcross the region, from Poland in the north to Serbia in the south, Eastern Europe has become a fertile ground for new forms of censorship that mostly eschew brute force but deploy gentler yet effective tools to constrict access to critical voices and tilt public opinion — and therefore elections — in favor of those in power.Television has become so biased in support of Mr. Vucic, according to Zoran Gavrilovic, the executive director of Birodi, an independent monitoring group, that Serbia has “become a big sociological experiment to see just how far media determines opinion and elections.”Serbia and Hungary — countries in the vanguard of what V-Dem Institute, a Swedish research group, described last year as a “global wave of autocratization” — both hold general elections in April, votes that will test whether media control works.A recent Birodi survey of news reports on Serbian television found that over a three-month period from September, Mr. Vucic was given more than 44 hours of coverage, 87 percent of it positive, compared with three hours for the main opposition party, 83 percent of which was negative.A billboard depicting President Aleksandar Vucic of Serbia was displayed on a building in Nis in December, ahead of his visit to the city.Sasa Djordjevic/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesNearly all of the negative coverage of Mr. Vucic appeared on N1, an independent news channel that broadcast Ms. Lalic’s Covid-19 reports. But a bitter war for market share is playing out between the cable provider that hosts N1 — Serbian Broadband, or SBB — and the state-controlled telecommunications company, Telekom Srbija.Telekom Srbija recently made a move that many saw as an unfair effort to make SBB less attractive to consumers when it snagged from SBB the rights to broadcast English soccer by offering to pay 700 percent more for them.Telekom Srbija’s offer, nearly $700 million for six seasons, is an astronomical amount for a country with only seven million people — and nearly four times what a media company in Russia, a far bigger market, has agreed to pay the Premier League each season for broadcast rights.“It is very difficult to compete if you have a competitor that does not really care about profit,” SBB’s chief executive, Milija Zekovic, said in an interview. The offices of the N1 cable news channel in Belgrade. N1 and a smaller station, Nova S, are the only TV outlets in Serbia that give regular airtime to opposition politicians.Marko Risovic for The New York TimesTelekom Srbija declined to make its executives available for comment, but in public statements, the company has described its investments in English soccer and elsewhere as driven by commercial concerns, not politics.“Their goal is to kill SBB,” Dragan Solak, the chairman of SBB’s parent company, United Group, said in an interview in London. “In the Balkans,” he added, “you do not want to be a bleeding shark.”Eager to stay in the game, Mr. Solak announced this month that a private investment company he controls had bought Southampton FC, an English Premier League soccer team. Broadcast rights for the league will stay with his state-controlled rival, but part of the huge sum it agreed to pay for them will now pass to Mr. Solak.Government loyalists run Serbia’s five main free-to-air television channels, including the supposedly neutral public broadcaster, RTS. The only television outlets in Serbia that give airtime to the opposition and avoid hagiographic coverage of Mr. Vucic are Mr. Solak’s cable news channel N1, which is affiliated with CNN, and his TV Nova.Without them, Mr. Solak said, Serbia “will be heading into the dark ages like North Korea.”Telekom Srbija recently snagged from SBB the rights to broadcast English soccer by offering to pay 700 percent more than what SBB had previously paid.Marko Risovic for The New York TimesSpace for critical media has been shrinking across the region, with V-Dem Institute, the Swedish research group, now ranking Serbia, Poland and Hungary among its “top 10 autocratizing countries,” citing “assaults on the judiciary and restrictions on the media and civil society.” Freedom House now classifies Serbia as “partly free.”In each country, security forces — the primary tools for muzzling critical voices during the communist era — have been replaced in this role by state-controlled and state-dependent companies that exert often irresistible pressure on the news media.Poland’s governing party, Law and Justice, has turned the country’s public broadcaster, TVP, into a propaganda bullhorn, while a state-run oil company has taken over a string of regional newspapers, though some national print outlets still regularly assail the government.In December, Law and Justice pushed through legislation that would have squeezed out the only independent television news channel, the American-owned TVN24, but the Polish president, worried about alienating Washington, vetoed the bill.Hungary has gone further, gathering hundreds of news outlets into a holding company controlled by allies of Prime Minister Viktor Orban. Only one television station with national reach is critical of Mr. Orban and financially independent from his government.Mr. Orban’s previously divided political rivals have formed a united front to fight elections in April but have been unsuccessful in shaking his stranglehold on the news media.“It is very difficult to compete if you have a competitor that does not really care about profit,” said Milija Zekovic, the chief executive of SBB.Marko Risovic for The New York TimesIn Serbia, the media space for critical voices has shrunk so far, said Zoran Sekulic, the founder and editor of FoNet, an independent news agency, that “the level of control, direct and indirect, is like in the 1990s” under Mr. Milosevic, whom Mr. Vucic served as information minister.Journalists, Mr. Sekulic added, do not get killed anymore, but the system of control endures, only “upgraded and improved” to ensure fawning coverage without brute force.When United Group started a relatively opposition-friendly newspaper last year, it could not find a printer in Serbia willing to touch it. The newspaper is printed in neighboring Croatia and sent into Serbia.Dragan Djilas, the leader of Serbia’s main opposition party and formerly a media executive, complained that while Mr. Vucic could talk for hours without interruption on Serbia’s main television channels, opposition politicians appeared mostly only as targets for attack. “I am like an actor in a silent movie,” he said.N1, the only channel that sometimes lets him talk, is widely watched in Belgrade, the capital, but is blocked in many towns and cities where mayors are members of Mr. Vucic’s party. Even in Belgrade, the cable company that hosts the channel has faced trouble entering new housing projects built by property developers with close ties to the government. A huge new housing area under construction for security officials near Belgrade, for example, has refused to install SBB’s cable, the company said.Viewers of pro-government channels “live in a parallel universe,” said Zeljko Bodrozic, the president of the Independent Journalists Association of Serbia. Channels like TV Pink, the most popular national station, which features sexually explicit reality shows and long statements by Mr. Vucic, he said, “don’t just indoctrinate, but make people stupid.”A new housing area under construction for security officials near Belgrade has refused to install SBB’s cable, the company said.Marko Risovic for The New York TimesThe European Union and the United States have repeatedly rebuked Mr. Vucic over the lack of media pluralism, but, eager to keep Serbia from embracing Russia or stoking unrest in neighboring Bosnia, have not pushed hard.This has given Mr. Vucic a largely free hand to expand the media control that Rasa Nedeljkov, the program director in Belgrade for the Center for Research, Transparency and Accountability, described as “the skeleton of his whole system.” In some ways, he added, Serbia’s space for critical media is now smaller than it was under Mr. Milosevic, who “didn’t really care about having total control” and left various regional outlets untouched.“Vucic is now learning from this mistake by Milosevic,” Mr. Nedeljkov said. Mr. Vucic and his allies, Mr. Nedeljkov added, “are not tolerating anything that is different.”Belgrade this month.Marko Risovic for The New York TimesOnce powerful independent voices have gradually been co-opted. The radio station B92, which regularly criticized Mr. Milosevic during the Balkan Wars of the 1990s, for example, is now owned by a supporter of Mr. Vucic and mostly parrots the government line.Journalists and others who upset Mr. Vucic face venomous attacks by tabloid newspapers loyal to the authorities. Mr. Solak, the United Group chairman, for example, has been denounced as “Serbia’s biggest scammer,” a crook gnawing at the country “like scabies” and a traitor working for Serbia’s foreign foes.Mr. Solak, who lives outside Serbia because of safety concerns, said he had become such a regular target for abuse that when he does not get attacked, “my friends call me and ask: What happened? Are you OK?” More