Soriek
11mo ago
Egypt
Speaking of fake elections, Egypt just held elections on Monday and Tuesday. We should know the results on the 18th, which will with overwhelming likelihood produce a victory for El-Sisi. Are people happy with his rule? At least from a bird’s eye view, things on the ground seem pretty rough:
Beyond Egypt’s frontiers, its neighbours are locked in seemingly intractable conflicts, with civil war raging in Sudan, and in Libya, rival governments vie for power on Cairo’s doorstep.
In 2022, public debt in Egypt stood at above 88 percent of the country’s GDP, more than double the region’s average. Inflation has consistently been above 35 percent since June.
Across the country, as household finances shrink, record numbers of Egyptians are reportedly searching for a second job while cutting back on household spending, including less and cheaper food. However, many analysts expect el-Sisi to win the upcoming election.
However, the whole kerfuffle to the west has definitely complicated things a bit. Egyptians are by and large extremely opposed to Israel and strongly dislike that their leaders won’t take a stronger stance:
"Before the 7th of October of this year (Hamas’ attack on Israel) the main issue was really economic: people were not happy with inflation, rising prices, the rising foreign debt, which is over $166 billion. Then, the 7th of October occurred and this idea that [Israel] will transfer Palestinians into the Sinai, so the issue of national security began to overtake [that of] the economy."
Most of this doesn’t matter all that much for the outcome of the election though. Sisi took power in a coup, held one rigged election since then, and called for this one randomly as well after banning numerous independent voices and orgs criticizing his administration and intimidating his main opposition, the leftist Ahmed el-Tantawy, into dropping out of the race. And thus:
El-Sissi faces no serious challenger, although there are three other candidates: Farid Zahran, head of the opposition Social Democratic Party; Abdel-Sanad Yamama, chairman of the Wafd Party; and Hazem Omar, head of the Republican People’s Party.
For now Sisi is here to say, for better or for worse.
Soriek
11mo ago
Guinea Bissau
Following the thwarted possible coup attempt in Sierra Leone, gunfire also broke out at the capital in Guinea Bissau, and President Umaro Sissoco Embalo has formally called it a coup. Apparently parliament didn’t take him seriously enough about it, so Embalo decided to just literally dissolve parliament as well as the government. This is actually not the first time he has dissolved parliament in the last year (the first following an actual coup attempt, so needless to say he’s not a man much bothered by an absence of a legislative branch. The opposition party is in power anyway and previously blocked an attempt for him to aggregate more power to the office of the President, so who’s gonna miss them). Embalo has not yet said when or if there will be new elections.
Soriek
11mo ago
Zimbabwe
I covered the Zimbabwean election this summer which secured President Emmerson Mnangagwa (who took power from Mugabe via coup in 2017) yet another term. However, his opposition, the Citizens Coalition for Change, ended his party, the Zanu PF’s, supermajority in the legislature. They didn’t become a minority or anything, they just can’t do like whatever they want at all. For instance, they can’t amend the constitution to end the two year term limit that would technically mean Mnangagwa can’t run again. Mnangagwa and ZANU-PF responded wisely and proportionally by vacating 15 of CCC’s seats. The story is honestly pretty great:
The crisis was sparked by a letter laden with spelling mistakes penned in October by Songezo Tshabangu, a little-known politician claiming to be the CCC’s interim secretary-general.
Addressed to the ZANU-PF parliamentary speaker, it stated that 15 CCC lawmakers elected in a bitterly contested August election had ceased to be party members and should lose their seats.
CCC leader Nelson Chamisa, 45, protested that Tshabangu was not a CCC member, the party had no secretary general and had not expelled any MP.
The speaker ignored him and ordered the by-elections, except in one seat where Tshabangu had misspelled the name of a lawmaker.
Political strategists, take note.
Soriek
11mo ago
Guatemala
I’ve covered the Guatemalan election escapades for a while here, with the powers that be pulling every dirty trick in the book to hang onto their position, including somehow ruling that the party that won is illegal. Well now the Attorney General’s office has announced the nullification of the election due to irregularities. This is beginning to look less like an establishment flailing and more like a standard coup. The National Electoral Tribune has rejected the claim so it’s far from clear that there’s consensus among government institutions to crush Arevalo. He is nominally supposed to take power in a month on January 14; it’ll be a nail biter till then.
Soriek
11mo ago
That's what I'm asking though, if they don't like the constitution / don't feel like it allows them to be a "normal" democracy, why not just amend it? The single term thing isn't some American imposition or Cold War measure, they've had that rule across their constitutions since the 19th century, in large part because they've had a consistent issue with executives trying to overstay their welcome.
In general where you say "normal democracy" you would be better served saying "nice country". Guatemala is nothing like a normal democracy, as I've covered closely here, and isn't a reasonable comparison of normalcy. Carefully skirting laws put in place by your people to prevent powerful executives, fighting gang violence by suspending traditional rule of law or freedom of the press, having the military threaten lawmakers who disagree with you, etc, may make El Salvador a "nicer country" from some people's perspectives, but it's a stretch to say it makes them a more normal democracy.
Venezuela
Venezuela held a referendum last Friday on whether or not to claim sovereignty over the Essequibo region of Guyana. Essequibo is mineral rich, and the exclusive economic zone contains quite a bit of oil, which Guyana has been busily contracting off to multinationals to Venezuela’s frustration.
Venezuela has always considered Essequibo as its own because the region was within its boundaries during the Spanish colonial period, and it has long disputed the border decided by international arbitrators in 1899 when Guyana was still a British colony.
That boundary was decided by arbitrators from Britain, Russia and the United States. The US represented Venezuela on the panel in part because the Venezuelan government had broken off diplomatic relations with Britain.
Venezuelan officials contend that Americans and Europeans conspired to cheat their country out of the land and argue that a 1966 agreement to resolve the dispute effectively nullified the original arbitration.
For reference, this is an area about the size of Greece (as Guardian helpfully points out) and equivalent to straight up two thirds of the territory of Guyana. Claiming the region amounts to essentially promising to invade and conquer most of the nation, so the Guyanese are understandably a little upset that the referendum has been approved. The linked article kind of suggests the >97% vote itself was fraudulent, or at least that observers didn’t see the kind of long lines and busy polling stations that the reported 10.5 million votes would have suggested. Ironically, this seems like the least interesting question to me; the anti-Maduro opposition also recognizes Essequibo as rightful VZL clay so it seems to be an idea with fairly popular support. The real question is: what happens next?
“Furthermore, Venezuelan military officials announced that Venezuela is taking concrete measures to build an airstrip to serve as a ‘logistical support point for the integral development of the Essequibo,’” she said.
The 61,600-square-mile (159,500 sq km) territory borders Brazil, whose defence ministry said earlier this week it has “intensified its defence actions” and boosted its military presence in the region as a result of the dispute.
Maduro is at least acting like he's serious:
Maduro said he would “immediately” proceed “to grant operating licenses for the exploration and exploitation of oil, gas and mines in the entire area of our Essequibo.” He also ordered the creation of local subsidiaries of Venezuelan public companies, including oil giant PDVSA and mining conglomerate Corporación Venezolana de Guayana....
In addition to the announcement regarding the exploitation of resources in Essequibo, Maduro announced Tuesday the creation of a new Comprehensive Defense Operational Zone, Zodi in Spanish, for the disputed strip, similar to the special military commands that conduct operations in different regions of the country.
But is Venezuela really about to invade Guyana? I would guess no, at least not while they have other issues and priorities they’re also focusing on (like becoming less of a regional or international pariah).
Meanwhile, can they even physically act on this? Guyana’s long term strategy in case of Venezuelan invasion has to be as un-invadable as possible, so a long time ago they designated the area on the border as a national park and left it extremely wild and overgrown. This makes traditional overland invasion difficult, so a hypothetical invasion could even require movement through Brazil, which is why Brazil itself is fortifying its own defenses. Lula has restored relations with Maduro, but he isn’t going to aid Venezuela in a hostile overland annexation of a long-time Brazilian ally by force.
So there probably isn’t a ton of will or means to act on this referendum. Most likely this is a way for Maduro to boost support in advance of the election.
And what about that election? In theory America’s lifting of the sanctions are contingent upon Venezuela lifting its ban on opposition leader Maria Machado from running in the election by the end of November. Well, it’s December now and things still look uncertain:
Opposition candidates barred from public office in Venezuela will be able to appear before the country's top tribunal, which will rule on their bans, the country's government and opposition said in a joint statement late on Thursday.
The announcement comes on the day of a United States deadline for the government of President Nicolas Maduro to take steps to remove the bans or risk the renewal of recently relaxed sanctions.
This is vague, but enough of a bone thrown that America isn’t going to reinstate sanctions right away, so it’ll be interesting to see what happens next. On the other hand, the top government prosecutor has suddenly accused several opposition of figures, so this is all somewhat two steps forward, three steps back. Ironically they are accused of trying to undermine the referendum on Guyana, which the opposition supported, and which is a largely amusing accusation given that the near 100% favorability results were quite likely fixed by the government anyway.
The United Kingdom
More updates on ex-Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s plan to deport migrants to Rwanda, temporarily frozen by Britain’s Supreme Court (is it weird that the court was founded in 2009 and can overturn major legislative decisions? It seems weird from the outside, even though that’s what a Supreme Court is supposed to do after all). The deal is apparently back on because Britain and Rwanda have now signed a formal agreement (which apparently overrules court decisions). The deal was overseen by James Cleverly, Suella Braverman’s replacement as Home Secretary:
Under the new treaty, signed by British Home Secretary (interior minister) James Cleverly and which replaces a non-binding memorandum of understanding, Britain said Rwanda would not expel asylum seekers to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened - one of the court's major concerns.
There will also be a monitoring committee to enable individuals to lodge confidential complaints directly to them, and a new appeal body made up of judges from around the world.
Cleverly said he expected migrants to be heading to Rwanda in the coming months because the treaty addressed all the issues raised by the Supreme Court..
However, many lawyers and charities said it was unlikely that deportation flights could start before an election expected next year. The opposition Labour Party, which has a double-digit lead in the polls, plans to ditch the Rwanda policy if it wins.
Under the plan agreed last year, Britain intends to send thousands of asylum seekers who arrived on its shores without permission to Rwanda to deter migrants making the dangerous journey across the Channel from Europe in small boats.
In return, Rwanda has received an initial payment of 140 million pounds ($180 million) with the promise of more money to fund the accommodation and care of any deported individuals.
The British parliament has now attempted to rush through a bill saying this is all well and good under the European Court of Human Rights. However, Robert Jenrick, the Immigration Minister, has actually suddenly resigned, apparently because he feels the legislation doesn't go far enough.
The legislation unveiled by the government on Wednesday did not take the UK out of the treaty, but did have a vital caveat attached to it. On the first page of the bill, UK Home Secretary James Cleverley said he could not guarantee that the legislation was “compatible with the Convention rights.”
The bill also disapplies certain sections of the UK Human Rights Act, a staple piece of legislation which incorporated the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic UK law. Another clause stipulates that the bill is sovereign and its validity is unaffected by key international law instruments including the ECHR and the Refugee Convention.
Soriek
11mo ago
Finland & China
Not two countries I thought I would be listing side by side, but Finland has been conducting its investigation into the early October incident that ruptured the gas pipeline between them and Estonia and the telecom wires between them and Sweden. Unfortunately for international stability, they seem to be pointing the finger at China.
An investigation by Finnish authorities identified as the main suspect Chinese container ship Newnew Polar Bear, which is believed to have dragged its anchor across the Baltic Sea seabed, cutting through the cables and gas lines. The anchor — which weighs 6,000 kilograms — was retrieved a few meters from the site of the damage.
Finland and Estonia have since been in touch with Chinese authorities seeking their cooperation with the investigation. The Baltic Times reported earlier this week that the two European countries have asked to send representatives to Beijing to investigate the vessel, which is currently en route to a Chinese port.
Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur expressed similar sentiment in an interview with Swedish public broadcaster SVT last month, saying the captain of the ship surely "understood that there was something wrong" after dragging an anchor for over 180 kilometers.
Coming more than a year after the Nord Stream gas pipelines connecting Russia to Germany were damaged by several explosions, the Balticconnector incident raises more concerns over the safety of undersea critical infrastructure and possible measures to protect them from external sabotage. No culprit has been identified for the Nord Stream attack despite an international investigation.
I’ll leave that last sentence hanging just to remind everyone how much weirdness there has been about figuring out who is to blame in all this (the west seems the most likely to have benefited from Nord Strom; pretty unclear who benefits here).
US & Philippines
This is essentially just a much a China issue as the previous post. Philippines for the past decade has somewhat waffled between leaning towards China or the US, especially under Duterte, the President who has done the most to emphasize the brutality of the American colonial administration of the nation. However, the past few years have seen the Philiipines leaning decisively back towards the US, especially as China grows more aggressive in the disputed territories of the South China Sea (we should really call that something else, shouldn’t we?) The US has even openly committed to defending the Philippines if they are attacked, a statement of such commitment towards a conflict that could very easily happen, even by accident, that even some hawkish anti-China folks swallowed a little nervously when they heard it.
The United States renewed a warning Monday that it would defend the Philippines in case of an armed attack under a 1951 treaty, after Chinese ships blocked and collided with two Filipino vessels off a contested shoal in the South China Sea…
"The Philippine government views the latest aggression by China as a blatant violation of international law," Teodoro said. "China has no legal right or authority to conduct law enforcement operations in our territorial waters and in our exclusive economic zone."...
"The United States stands with our Philippine allies in the face of the People's Republic of China coast guard and maritime militia's dangerous and unlawful actions obstructing an October 22 Philippine resupply mission to Second Thomas Shoal," the U.S. State Department said in a statement issued by its embassy in Manila.
It blamed the dangerous maneuvers by China's ships for the collisions and added that they "violated international law by intentionally interfering with the Philippine vessels' exercise of high seas freedom of navigation."
Reuters offers a bit of a retrospective on how the two countries became close again:
Manila-based political analyst Julio Amador III described the U.S. outreach as “unprecedented love-bombing” aimed at resetting the U.S.-Philippines relationship. Marcos’ predecessor, the populist firebrand Rodrigo Duterte, was openly hostile to the United States and attempted to bring his country closer to communist China during his six-year term.
There is urgency to the U.S. charm offensive: America needs Manila squarely in its camp as tensions with China rise in the Asia-Pacific.
The Philippines, Taiwan’s neighbor to the south, would be an indispensable staging point for the U.S. military to aid Taipei in the event of a Chinese attack, military analysts say.
The State Department also cited a 2016 arbitration ruling that invalidated China's expansive claims to the South China Sea on historical grounds, including in Second Thomas Shoal.
Washington lays no claims to the disputed sea but has deployed forces to patrol the waters to promote freedom of navigation and overflight — moves that have angered Beijing, which has warned the U.S. to stop meddling in what it says is a purely Asian dispute.
El Salvador
A few weeks ago @Dean wrote a detailed writeup of how Nayib Bukele plans to technically qualify for another term in office. The long story short is that the constitution doesn’t explicitly ban candidates from having multiple terms, it just bans them from succeeding themselves, so he’s going to step down, be replaced temporarily by a puppet, then run again. Poof, voila, it’s all under the law.
Congress has now formally granted Bukele a six month leave of absence. Not exactly exhausting himself in proving critics wrong that his replacement will be a puppet, the new President is literally just his secretary. Congratulations to Claudia Juana Rodríguez de Guevara, the first woman President of El Salvador.
It kinda raises the question: what’s the point of all this? Why go through the motions of a very low effort, transparent, by-the-letter-of-the-law power grab? With a reliable supermajority of senators voting for this, would they really draw the line at just amending the constitution to let him hold another term? All the cool autocrats have done it.
Netherlands
Negotiations on the Dutch government appear to still be stalled:
The official appointed to investigate possible coalitions after the Dutch election won by Geert Wilders ' far-right Party for Freedom said Friday he needs more time because of reluctance by potential partners to join Wilders in a government…
The delay comes after two key parties backed away from joining a coalition with Wilders. The new leader of the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) of outgoing prime minister Mark Rutte has said she will not join a coalition led by Wilders, but would offer it support in parliament.
Pieter Omtzigt, the leader of another potential coalition partner, New Social Contract, told Plasterk he was not yet ready to discuss forming a coalition with Wilders.
Similar to Spain and Poland, I will likely continue to provide updates here until the chips have fallen. Previous posts on the Dutch election can be found here and here.
Peru
Last week I covered Peruvian President Dina Boularte being accused by the Attorney General of human rights abuses. For a point of comparison or precedent, I brought up former President Alberto Fujimori (father of opposition leader Keiko Fujimori) who is currently serving a 25 year sentence for human rights abuses in the same prison as ex-President Castillo. Ironically, this last week the top Peruvian constitutional court ruled to restore a previous Presidential pardon for Fujimori.
Fujimori was President from 1990 to 2000, following a highly populist leader named Alan Garcia1 who ran the country into hyperinflation. Fujimori preceded to liberalize the economy and sent Peru into “Fuji-shock,” a period of short term pain followed by greater stability. The arc is somewhat similar to Pinochet’s neolibreal overhaul following Allende’s populism, inviting the pejorative nickname “El Chinochet,” which apparently Fujimori himself wasn’t so mad about it.
The other similarity between the two leaders was their uncompromising approach to left wing anti-government forces, which in Peru were much more serious than Chile. Aside from the economy, the big issue of the time was El Sendero Luminoso, the Shining Path, a Maoist terrorist group that had been fighting the government for a decade by the 90s (there is an interesting conversation to be had about how much time and money China sunk into spreading its ideology in Africa with little success, only for copycat movements to appear in places like Peru that they never even reached out to). Fujimori addressed this in straightforward fashion by forming death squads and granting them amnesty for human rights abuses, as well as commissioning the armed forces to massacre and mass sterilize Peru’s indigenous population (The Shining Path leadership were European-Peruvians who in theory wanted to draw their membership from the impoverished indigenous Peruvians, but in practice spent more time killing them). Ultimately things caught up with him and he was convicted for directly ordering one of these massacres, as well as for embezzlement.
A later President, Kuczynski Godard, pardoned Fujimori after Fujimori’s son Kenji helped him slide through impeachment hearings over his involvement in the infamous Operation Car Wash scandal that sent Brazilian President Lula to prison. It was pretty nakedly political and the courts reversed it.
So needless to say overturning the ruling now and releasing him from prison is a controversial move. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has protested the decision and urged Peru not to release him, and within a couple days the courts reversed their move and said that he will remain in prison. The decision appears to be reversed again and yesterday Fujimori was officially released from prison. It should still be said that Fujimori is like 85 and probably doesn’t have much longer left anyway, so the main impact of this decision is symbolic. However, the intermediate ruling has unfortunately hit the family twice as hard, and Keiko Fujimori will now be forced to face charges for her role in…also Operation Car Wash.
1Ironically Garcia came back to power in 2006 and oversaw a period of consistent economic growth. He later killed himself after being implicated in, you guessed it, Operation car Wash. If you are wondering if there are any Peruvian politicians who weren’t involved in the scandal, you are not alone.
Spain
Last week I reported on Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez finally securing another term through allying with the Catalan independence party Junts by offering amnesty for their illegal referendum. This is an unpopular move even among left wing voters and he may come to regret the alliance very soon. Puigemont, leader of Junts, has already threatened to withdraw his support and offer it to the conservatives if Sanchez does not take steps towards Catalan independence.
Speaking to Brussels Playbook on the sidelines of the POLITICO 28 gala dinner on Tuesday night, Puigdemont said his seven Junts MPs, who struck a deal to prop up Sánchez’s government earlier this month in exchange for an amnesty for everyone involved in the failed 2017 Catalan independence referendum, would be open to working with the conservative Popular Party (PP) to depose Sánchez mid-term.
Junts would consider a motion of no confidence in Sánchez’s government if it could agree with the PP on an independent prime minister to replace the Socialist, said Puigdemont, “But for that, the PP must make a step toward us … they cannot keep treating me like a terrorist.” The Popular Party won the most votes in Spain’s July election, but could not form a government.
Asked about Puigdemont’s comments on Wednesday, Popular Party leader Alberto Núñez Feijóo appeared reticent about any potential tie-up, telling Spanish media he could not “accept” Junts’ “conditions” because “they are illegal and go against the constitution and the equality of Spaniards.”
Is this a serious threat? The center right PP would only be able to hold a majority, even with Junts, if they worked with the far right Vox, a nationalist party literally created as a backlash to the Catalan independence referendum. Vox was so desparate to unseat the socialists that they promised to support a PP government even if they didn’t get any ministerial posts, but working together with their sworn enemy is surely a bridge too far (and presumably the same is true for Junts voters as well). So no, likely there is no actual coalition that could form a government, but things could be forced to another election, where the left wing parties would do worse, ironically partially because they’re kowtowing to Catalan demands at all. Sanchez’ rule is and will likely continue to be a very unstable one (and I do imagine he will probably hold onto power, only weakly so).
Soriek
11mo ago
Many thanks, it can definitely be time consuming prepping these so it's good to here people are enjoying them. I would definitely be interested in the Russian program; in general I feel like this place could benefit from regular updates on Russia (and China for that matter) from people more knowledgable than me.
Soriek
11mo ago
Thanks for the update into the budget process. Do you have any insight into how the snap election will go?
Soriek
11mo ago
Not against that, but it still suggests looking at things through the framework of figuring out who the victims are (in order to uplift them) is valid, ordinary Christian business.
That must have been what I was thinking of since it's from the 1957 Moscow Conference of Communist countries. I read it first in Julia Lovell's "Maoism: A Global History". I do remember it having a little more, or maybe just her having some specific commentary, but unfortunately I've only got the physical book and can't search through it.
Soriek
11mo ago
The US gave India over half a billion in direct aid and loans at the time, much more than the Soviets (though the Soviets provided more military aid ofc). He's reffering to Kissinger threatening to suspend that aid if India declared war on Pakistan, a pretty serious threat indeed.
Soriek
11mo ago
He wasn't responsible for the genocide in Bangladesh, but it's fair to hold him responsible for playing a primary role in knowingly aiding the genociders:
Kissinger was well-informed about the atrocities being committed by his allies in West Pakistan. In fact, on April 6, 1971, the US consulate in Dacca cabled a telegram to Washington in which the diplomatic staff expressed “strong dissent” to US policy in Pakistan and accused the country of carrying out a genocide in East Pakistan. The telegram expressed dismay over Washington’s refusal to “denounce atrocities.” Kissinger, therefore, was fully aware of the violence for which he was advocating support.
During the conflict, the United States provided Pakistan with arms via Jordan and Iran. Kissinger and Nixon supported this policy despite being warned in legal briefs from both the State Department and the Pentagon that such actions were illegal. Washington did not even ask the Pakistani military to refrain from using American weapons during the conflict.
Kissinger was desperate to see West Pakistan emerge as the victor. On December 10, he decided to send in the US Navy. Kissinger delivered a presidential order to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff commanding that the US aircraft carrier Enterprise be relocated from Vietnam, where it was stationed at the time, to the Bay of Bengal. The Enterprise was to be accompanied by nine warships and 2,000 marines...
Kissinger’s task force emboldened Pakistan’s leaders in their resolve to suppress the independence movement in East Pakistan. Pakistan’s president, Yahya Khan, even hinted to his colleagues that the American military would intervene. Kissinger had earlier urged him not to accept a ceasefire in East Pakistan, which would have prevented at least some casualties. Taking this, along with the presence of the Enterprise in the Bay of Bengal, as signs of a forthcoming US intervention, Khan extended the war by a few days...
despite having great leverage on the leaders of West Pakistan, Nixon and Kissinger failed to prevent the military crackdown in East Pakistan. And the two men really did have the power to influence West Pakistan’s leaders. When they had asked General Yahya Khan, in the midst of the unrest, to get rid of Lieutenant General Tikka Khan, a West Pakistani military man, from governing East Pakistan, Yahya Khan promptly did so. Kissinger and Nixon also convinced Khan not to execute Mujib-ur-Rehman, future president of Bangladesh, when a wartime trial was held against him.
Soriek
11mo ago
To be fair he would also say stuff like this to his allies, in private. There was some transcript of a conference of socialist countries I think in the 50s where Mao is like "well, China will naturally be the leaders of the socialist revolution because we have so many people that we'll best survive the inevitable nuclear war," and all the other countries would be like "inevitable nuclear war? Come again?"
Soriek
11mo ago
The world order he pushed makes national sovereignty impossible as we are all subject to an imposed world order by the US.
American FoPo before the Kissinger era was much more self-conciously about America being the hegemon and not being able to tolerate rival power centers. Nixon and Kissinger were unique partially because they believed there not only could but should be multiple great powers.
The President is proceeding not only to establish a rapprochement with Peking but to work out specific accords with China's main adversary, the Soviet Union, and to encourage new trade with the restive Communist nations of Eastern Europe, all the while trying to stabilize a non‐Communist Government in South Vietnam. Without repudiating U.S. commitments, he hopes to avoid new ones. He keeps out of disputes whenever he can, wary of U.S. intervention in such explosive situations the India‐Pakistan conflict and the Middle East. In short, postwar U.S. foreign policy has been turned upside down...
His approach to world politics is to see a pattern of relationships involving five major power centers: the United States, Russia, China, Japan and, eventually, Western Europe (including Britain). In this pentagonal world each power center will be constrained by the others. The President first made this vision explicit last summer in Kansas City, when he explained the passing of the cold war. “Twenty‐five years ago,” he said, “we were No. 1 in the world militarily, with no one who even challenged us, because we had a monopoly of atomic weapons. Now, 25 years having passed we see five great economic superpowers: the United States, Western Europe, the Soviet Union, China and, of Japan"...
Nixon has articulated a concert of great powers that resembles in some respects the balance of power in Europe during much of the 19th century. “We must remember,” he has said, “the only time in the history of the world that we have had any extended periods of peace is when there has been a balance of power. I think it will be a safer world and a better world if we have strong, healthy United States. Europe, Soviet Union, China, Japan — each balancing the other, not playing one against the other, an even balance.”
Soriek
11mo ago
Netherlands
Our users @Nantafiria and @MartianNight have covered the results of the Dutch election in detail in last week’s roundup. Among the possible coalitions @Nantafiria floated included an alliance between the ruling VVD (24 seats), the NSC (a splinter of the former Christian Democrat opposition party, 20 seats), and the far right PVV (37 seats). Nanta also mentioned that the former two have expressed skepticism in the latter, and this week that seems to have materialized, with VVD announcing they will not join a government with PVV. The other big winner of the election, GL/Pvda (Green Left-Labor) will not be lending their 25 votes to the PVV either. It remains unclear for now which way NSC will swing, it seems contingent on PVV toning things down a bit, which they’ve signaled some willingness to do:
[Wilder’s] party's election platform states that the Netherlands “is not an Islamic country. No Islamic schools, Qurans and mosques.”... [NSC’s] centrist leader, Pieter Omtzigt, said he couldn't accept “unconstitutional” policies. Article 1 of the Dutch Constitution outlaws discrimination “on grounds of religion, belief, political opinion, race, gender, disability, sexual orientation or on any other grounds.”
In an election-night victory speech, Wilders pledged not to push any policies that would breach Dutch law or the constitution.
A coalition between PVV and NSC would still leave them with 57 votes, several shy of the 76 needed for a majority. The farmer party BBB might also throw their 7 seats on board. Also contentious are PVV’s stance against sending aid to Ukraine; it’ll be interesting if they moderate on this as well to attract smaller parties. Hopefully our locals can provide more detail!
Soriek
11mo ago
Poland
A month and a half after the election Poland has finally kinda sorta formed a government, or as Politico rather impolitely puts it:
“Poland’s zombie government shuffles into being: One former PM joked that the new Cabinet led by Mateusz Morawiecki would have a lifespan shorter than that of a house fly.”
Polish President Andrzej Duda on Monday swore in a new government headed by Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki — whose term in office is likely to be only a maximum of 14 days.
Why so short? Well, because they lost, of course. PiS was still the biggest winner in terms of overall votes so they get the first chance to form a government, but they wouldn’t have a majority even with the far right Confederation, who has refused to work with them anyway. It’s weird, but I guess Morawiecki has two weeks to appoint ministers and run a normal government before a vote of confidence happens, which he will lose.
in a sign of the real import of the ceremony, the speakers of both the parliament and the upper chamber Senate didn’t bother showing up.
After that two weeks then Donald Tusk’s Civic Coalition gets its chance to form a coalition, which for now is hammered out:
Tusk’s Civic Coalition is an electoral alliance of four parties led by his centrist Civic Platform party which also includes the Greens.
A new political group called the Third Way includes the long-established agrarian party, the Polish People’s Party, and Poland 2050, a relatively new party led by Szymon Holownia, a conservative Catholic who had trained to be a Dominican friar but became a journalist and was co-host of Poland’s Got Talent reality show.
Another coalition partner, the New Left, includes some former members of the pre-1989 Communist party but increasingly a new generation of younger progressives. It stresses support for women’s and LGBTQ+ rights and for fighting climate change.
Hong Kong
Hong Kong held elections on Sunday, the first since the 2019 elections that elevated pro-democracy candidates and set off the whole conflict between HK and the mainland. Needless to say, the results this time were quite different:
More options
Context Copy link