FORMS OF GOVERNANCE

Current issues, news and ethics
Post Reply
kmaherali
Posts: 25209
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

The Great Struggle for Liberalism

Post by kmaherali »

Image

In 1978, the Russian dissident Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn gave a commencement address at Harvard, warning us about the loss of American self-confidence and will. “A decline in courage may be the most striking feature that an outside observer notices in the West today,” he declared.

Today, those words ring with disturbing force. The enemies of liberal democracy seem to be full of passionate intensity — Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Donald Trump, campus radicals. Meanwhile, those who try to defend liberal norms can sometimes seem like some of those Republicans who ran against Trump in the 2016 primaries — decent and good, but kind of feckless and about to be run over.

Into this climate emerges Fareed Zakaria’s important new book, “Age of Revolutions: Progress and Backlash From 1600 to the Present.” One of the powerful features of this book is that Zakaria doesn’t treat liberal democratic capitalism as some set of abstract ideas. He shows how it was created by real people in real communities who wanted richer, fuller and more dynamic lives.

His story starts in the Dutch Republic in the 16th century. The Dutch invented the modern profit-seeking corporation. The Dutch merchant fleet was capable of carrying more tonnage than the fleets of France, England, Scotland, the Holy Roman Empire, Spain and Portugal combined. By the 18th century, Amsterdam’s per capita income was four times that of Paris.

Dutch success wasn’t just economic. There was a cultural flowering (Rembrandt, Vermeer). There was urbanization — the building of great towns and cities. There was a civic and political stability built around decentralized power. There was a relatively egalitarian culture — until the 19th century, there were no statues of heroes on horseback in Holland. There was also moral restraint. Dutch Calvinism was on high alert for the corruption that prosperity might bring. It encouraged self-discipline and norms that put limits on the display of wealth.

The next liberal leap forward occurred in Britain. In the Glorious Revolution of the late 1680s, a Dutchman, William of Orange, became King of England and helped import some of the more liberal Dutch political institutions, ushering in a period of greater political and religious moderation. Once again, you see the same pattern: Technical and economic dynamism goes hand in hand with cultural creativity, political reform, urbanization, a moral revival and, it must be admitted, vast imperialist expansion.

British inventors and tinkerers like James Watt perfected the steam engine. From 1770 to 1870 real British wages rose by 50 percent, and over the first half of the 19th century British life expectancy increased by about 3.5 years.

The great reform acts in the 1800s gave more people the right to vote and reduced political corruption. The rise of, for example, the evangelical Clapham Sect in the early 19th century was part of a vast array of social movements led by people who sought to abolish the slave trade, reduce child labor, reform the prison system, reduce cruelty to animals, ease the lives of the poor and introduce codes of propriety into Victorian life. America was next, and the pattern replicated itself: new inventions like the telephone and the electric lightbulb. People flooding into the cities. During the 20th century, American culture dominated the globe. Thanks in part to the postwar American liberal order, living standards surged. As Zakaria notes, “Compared to 1980, global G.D.P. had nearly doubled by 2000, and more than tripled by 2015.”

And yet for all its benefits, liberalism is ailing and in retreat in places like Turkey, India, Brazil and, if Trump wins in 2024, America itself. Zakaria’s book helped me develop a more powerful appreciation for the glories of liberalism, and also a better understanding of what’s gone wrong.

I’m one of those people who subscribes to the Austrian psychiatrist Viktor Frankl’s doctrine: “Man’s search for meaning is the primary motivation in his life.” To feel at home in the world, people need to see themselves serving some good — doing important work, loving others well, living within coherent moral communities, striving on behalf of some set of ideals.

The great liberal societies that Zakaria describes expanded and celebrated individual choice and individual freedom. But when liberalism thrived, that personal freedom lay upon a foundation of commitments and moral obligations that precede choice: our obligations to our families, to our communities and nations, to our ancestors and descendants, to God or some set of transcendent truths.

Over the past few generations, the celebration of individual freedom has overspilled its banks and begun to erode the underlying set of civic obligations. Especially after World War II and then into the 1960s, we saw the privatization of morality — the rise of what came to be known as the ethos of moral freedom. Americans were less likely to assume that people learn values by living in coherent moral communities. They were more likely to adopt the belief that each person has to come up with his or her own personal sense of right and wrong. As far back as 1955, the columnist Walter Lippmann saw that this was going to lead to trouble: “If what is good, what is right, what is true, is only what the individual ‘chooses’ to ‘invent,’ then we are outside the traditions of civility,” he wrote.

Trust is the faith that other people will do what they ought to do. When there are no shared moral values and norms, then social trust plummets. People feel alienated and under siege, and, as Hannah Arendt observed, lonely societies turn to authoritarianism. People eagerly follow the great leader and protector, the one who will lead the us/them struggle that seems to give life meaning.

During our current moment of global populism, the liberal tradition is under threat. Many people have gone economically nationalist and culturally traditionalist. Around the world, authoritarian moralists promise to restore the old ways, the old religion, national greatness. “There are certain things which are more important than ‘me,’ than my ego — family, nation, God,” Viktor Orban declared. Such men promise to restore the anchors of cultural, moral and civic stability, but they use brutal and bigoted strongman methods to get there.

President Biden tried to win over the disaffected by showering them with jobs and economic benefits. It doesn’t seem to have worked politically because the real absence people are feeling is an absence of meaning, belonging and recognition.

This election year, in the United States and around the globe, will be about whether liberalism can thrive again. Zakaria’s book will help readers feel honored and grateful that we get to be part of this glorious and ongoing liberal journey. He understands that we liberals can’t just offer economic benefits; we also have to make the spiritual and civic case for our way of life. He writes: “The greatest challenge remains to infuse that journey with moral meaning, to imbue it with the sense of pride and purpose that religion once did — to fill that hole in the heart.”

There’s glory in striving to add another chapter to the great liberal story — building a society that is technologically innovative, commercially daring, with expanding opportunities for all; building a society in which culture is celebrated, families thrive, a society in which the great diversity of individuals can experience a sense of common purpose and have the space and energy to pursue their own adventures in living.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/opin ... 778d3e6de3
kmaherali
Posts: 25209
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Re: FORMS OF GOVERNANCE

Post by kmaherali »

From the Horror to the Envy of Africa: Rwanda’s Leader Holds Tight Grip

Thirty years after a devastating genocide, Rwanda has made impressive gains. But ethnic divisions persist under an iron-fisted president who has ruled for just as long.

Image
President Paul Kagame of Rwanda in 2021. The architect of the country’s stunning transformation, he achieved it with harsh methods that would normally attract international condemnation.Credit...Simon Wohlfahrt/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Blood coursed through the streets of Rwanda’s capital, Kigali, in April 1994 as machete-wielding militiamen began a campaign of genocide that killed as many as 800,000 people, one of the great horrors of the late 20th century.

Thirty years later, Kigali is the envy of Africa. Smooth streets curl past gleaming towers that hold banks, luxury hotels and tech startups. There is a Volkswagen car plant and an mRNA vaccine facility. A 10,000-seat arena hosts Africa’s biggest basketball league and concerts by stars like Kendrick Lamar, the American rapper, who performed there in December.

Tourists fly in to visit Rwanda’s famed gorillas. Government officials from other African countries arrive for lessons in good governance. The electricity is reliable. Traffic cops do not solicit bribes. Violence is rare.

The architect of this stunning transformation, President Paul Kagame, achieved it with harsh methods that would normally attract international condemnation. Opponents are jailed, free speech is curtailed and critics often die in murky circumstances, even those living in the West. Mr. Kagame’s soldiers have been accused of massacre and plunder in the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo.

ImageA view of the city center of Kigali.
Image
Three decades after the Rwandan genocide, Kigali is a modern capital and a destination for tourists, conventioneers and African officials.Credit...Ludovic Marin/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

For decades, Western leaders have looked past Mr. Kagame’s abuses. Some have expressed guilt for their failure to halt the genocide, when Hutu extremists massacred people mostly from Mr. Kagame’s Tutsi ethnic group. Rwanda’s tragic history makes it an “immensely special case,” Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, once said.

Mr. Kagame will commemorate the 30th anniversary of the genocide on Sunday, when he is expected to lay wreaths at mass graves, light a flame of remembrance and deliver a solemn speech that may well reinforce his message of exceptionalism. “Never again,” he often says.

But the anniversary is also a sharp reminder that Mr. Kagame, 66, has been in power for just as long. He won the last presidential election with 99 percent of votes. The outcome of the next one, scheduled for July, is in little doubt. Under Rwanda’s Constitution, he could lead for another decade.

The milepost has given new ammunition to critics who say that Mr. Kagame’s repressive tactics, previously seen as necessary — even by critics — to stabilize Rwanda after the genocide, increasingly appear to be a way for him to entrench his iron rule.

Questions are also growing about where he is leading his country. Although he claims to have effectively banished ethnicity from Rwanda, critics — including diplomats, former government officials and many other Rwandans — say he presides over a system that is shaped by unspoken ethnic cleavages that make the prospect of genuine reconciliation seem as distant as ever.

A spokeswoman for Rwanda’s government did not respond to questions for this article. The authorities declined accreditation to me to enter the country. A second Times reporter has been allowed in.

Image
A group of men, mostly in yellow shirts, using shovels in the dirt. Trees and rooftops are visible in the background.
Image
Villagers and volunteers in Ngoma, Rwanda, digging for remains of victims of the Rwandan genocide after dozens of bodies were discovered there in January.Credit...Guillem Sartorio/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Ethnic Tutsis dominate the top echelons of Mr. Kagame’s government, while the Hutus who make up 85 percent of the population remain excluded from true power, critics say. It is a sign that ethnic division, despite surface appearances, is still very much a factor in the way Rwanda is governed.

“The Kagame regime is creating the very conditions that cause political violence in our country,” Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, his most prominent political opponent, said by phone from Kigali. “Lack of democracy, absence of rule of law, social and political exclusion — it’s the same problems we had before.”

Ms. Ingabire, a Hutu, returned to Rwanda from exile in 2010 to run against Mr. Kagame for president. She was arrested, barred from taking part in the election and later imprisoned on charges of conspiracy and terrorism. Released in 2018, when Mr. Kagame pardoned her, Ms. Ingabire cannot travel abroad and is barred from standing in the election in July.

“I agree with those who say Rwanda needed a strongman ruler after the genocide, to bring order in our country, ” she said. “But today, after 30 years, we need strong institutions more than we need strong men.”

Image
A woman wearing a green jacket standing near the wall of her home. A garden is visible in the background.
Image
Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza at home in Kigali on Monday. A political opponent of Mr. Kagame, she said his government was “creating the very conditions that cause political violence in our country.”Credit...The New York Times

Mr. Kagame burst into power in July 1994, sweeping into Kigali at the head of a Tutsi-dominated rebel group, the Rwandan Patriotic Front, which ousted the Hutu extremists who orchestrated the genocide. Randy Strash, a worker with the aid agency World Vision, arrived a few weeks later to find a “ghost town.”

“No gas stations, no stores, no communications,” he recalled. “Abandoned vehicles by the side of the road, riddled with bullets. At night, the sound of gunshots and hand grenades. It was something else.”

Mr. Strash set up his tent across the street from a camp where Mr. Kagame was quartered. Hutu fighters attacked the camp several times, trying to kill Mr. Kagame, Mr. Strash said. But it was not until a decade later, at an event at the University of Washington, that he met the Rwandan leader in person.

“Very polite and reasonable in his responses,” Mr. Strash recalled. “Clear, thoughtful and thought-provoking.”

Image
A portrait of Randy Strash, who is wearing a blue shirt and sitting on a beige couch.
Image
Randy Strash, a former aid worker with World Vision, at home in Washington State. He recalled Mr. Kagame as “clear, thoughtful and thought-provoking” when they met years after the conflict.Credit...Grant Hindsley for The New York Times

Historical documents released by Human Rights Watch this past week show how much U.S. leaders knew about the slaughter as it unfolded. Writing to President Bill Clinton on May 16, 1994, the researcher Alison Des Forges urged him “to protect these defenseless civilians from murderous militia.”

Since coming to power, Mr. Kagame has had a reputation for spending aid wisely and promoting forward-looking economic policies. Although former aides have accused him of manipulating official statistics to exaggerate progress, Rwanda’s trajectory is impressive: Average life expectancy rose to 66 years from 40 years between 1994 and 2021, the United Nations says.

One of Mr. Kagame’s first acts was to publicly erase the dangerous divisions that had fueled the genocide. He banned the terms Hutu and Tutsi from identity cards and effectively criminalized public discussion of ethnicity. “We are all Rwandan” became the national motto.

But in reality, ethnicity continued to suffuse nearly every aspect of life, reinforced by Mr. Kagame’s policies. “Everyone knows who is who,” said Joseph Sebarenzi, a Tutsi who served as the president of Rwanda’s Parliament until 2000, when he fled into exile.

A survey published last year by Filip Reyntjens, a Belgian professor and outspoken Kagame critic, found that 82 percent of 199 top government positions were held by ethnic Tutsi — and nearly 100 percent in Mr. Kagame’s office. American diplomats reached a similar conclusion in 2008, after conducting their own survey of Rwanda’s power structure.

Mr. Kagame “must begin to share authority with Hutus to a much greater degree” if his country were to surmount the divides of the genocide, the U.S. Embassy wrote in a cable that was later published by WikiLeaks.

Image
Rwanda Marks the Anniversary of the Genocide: The Country Is Still Grappling With Its Legacy (Published in 2019) https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/worl ... latedLinks
As world leaders have expressed regret over failing to stop the massacre of as many as one million people in Rwanda, its president, Paul Kagame, has entrenched his power and punished dissent.
April 5, 2024

Critics accuse Mr. Kagame of using the memory of the events of 1994 to suppress the Hutu majority.

Official commemorations mention “the genocide of the Tutsi” but play down or ignore the tens of thousands of moderate Hutus who were also killed, often trying to save their Tutsi neighbors.

A perception of selective justice rubs salt into those wounds. Mr. Kagame’s troops killed 25,000 to 45,000 people, mostly Hutu civilians, from April to August 1994, according to disputed U.N. findings. Yet fewer than 40 of his officers have been tried for those crimes, according to Human Rights Watch.

Image
A black-and-white image of men in military attire holding guns and hanging off a truck. The driver, bottom left, is wearing a hat and glasses.
Image
Mr. Kagame, bottom left, as a commander of the Rwandan Patriotic Front, near Kigali in 1994.Credit...Gilles Peress/Magnum Photos

The Hutu killings are incomparable in scale or nature to the genocide. But Mr. Kagame’s lopsided approach to dealing with those events is hampering Rwandans’ ability to reconcile and move on, critics say.

“Anyone not familiar with Rwanda might think that everything is fine,” Mr. Sebarenzi said. “People work together, they go to church together, they do business together. That is good. But under the carpet, those ethnic divisions are still there.”

Although Mr. Kagame has appointed Hutus to senior positions in government since 1994, including prime minister and defense minister, those appointees have little real power, said Omar Khalfan, a former official with Rwanda’s national intelligence service who fled into exile in the United States in 2015.

Tutsi loyalists are planted in the offices of senior Hutus to keep an eye on them, said Mr. Khalfan, a Tutsi. “The regime doesn’t want to speak about ethnicity because it raises the issue of power-sharing,” he said. “And they don’t want that.”

In the West, Mr. Kagame is a firm favorite at gatherings of the global elite such as the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where he met with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine in January. But at home, those who publicly challenge him risk arrest, torture or death.

Image
Two people lighting a flame at a metallic structure. A crowd of people and a white tent are visible in the background.
Image
Mr. Kagame and Jeannette Kagame, the first lady, lighting the flame at a genocide memorial in Kigali in 2022.Credit...Simon Wohlfahrt/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

A decade ago, Kizito Mihigo, a charismatic gospel singer, was among Rwanda’s most popular artists. A Tutsi who lost his parents in the genocide, Mr. Mihigo often sang at genocide commemorations and was said to be close to Mr. Kagame’s wife, Jeannette.

But on the 20th anniversary, Mr. Mihigo released a song that in coded lyrics called on Rwandans to show empathy for both Tutsi and Hutu victims — effectively, a call for greater reconciliation.

Mr. Kagame was furious. A presidential aide said he “didn’t like my song, and that I should ask him for forgiveness,” Mr. Mihigo recalled in 2016. If the singer refused to comply, he added, “they said I’d be dead.”

Mr. Mihigo apologized but was convicted on treason charges and imprisoned. Released four years later, he found he was blacklisted as a singer. In 2020, he was arrested again as he tried to slip across the border to Burundi and, four days later, found dead in a police station.

The government said Mr. Mihigo had taken his life, but few believed it. “He was a very strong Christian who believed in God,” said Ms. Ingabire, the opposition politician, who came to know Mr. Mihigo in prison. “I can’t believe this is true.”

Image
Kizito Mihigo wearing a brown blazer and facing the camera.
Image
The Rwandan singer Kizito Mihigo in 2014.
Credit...Stephanie Aglietti/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Mr. Kagame’s reach extends across the globe. Rights groups have documented dozens of cases of Rwandan exiles being intimidated, attacked or assassinated by presumed agents of the state in at least a dozen countries, including Canada, Australia and South Africa.

Mr. Khalfan, the former intelligence officer, said he was approached at home in Ohio in 2019 by a man he identified as an undercover Rwandan agent. The man tried to lure him to Dubai — a similar ruse to the one that caused Paul Rusesabagina, a Hutu hotelier whose story featured in the movie “Hotel Rwanda,” to be tricked into returning to the country in 2020.

Mr. Rusesabagina was released from prison last year, after years of U.S. pressure. The episode only underscored how little real resistance Mr. Kagame faces at home. But a more immediate worry lies across the border, in eastern Congo.

There, the United States and the United Nations have publicly accused Rwanda of sending troops and missiles in support of M23, a notorious rebel group that swept across the territory in recent months, causing widespread displacement and suffering. The M23 has long been seen as a Rwandan proxy force in Congo, where Mr. Kagame’s troops have been accused of plundering rare minerals and massacring civilians. Rwanda denies the charges.

The crisis has cooled Mr. Kagame’s relations with the United States, his largest foreign donor, American officials say. Senior Biden administration officials traveled to Rwanda, Congo and, more discreetly, Tanzania in recent months in an effort to prevent the crisis from spiraling into a regional war. In August, the United States imposed sanctions on a senior Rwandan military commander for his role in backing the M23.

U.S. officials described tense, sometimes confrontational meetings between Mr. Kagame and senior American officials, including the U.S.A.I.D. administrator, Samantha Power, over Rwanda’s role in eastern Congo.

Mr. Kagame has often denied that Rwandan troops are in Congo, but he appeared to admit the opposite tacitly in a recent interview with Jeune Afrique magazine.

In justifying their presence, he fell back on familiar logic: that he was acting to prevent a second genocide, this time against the ethnic Tutsi population in eastern Congo.

Image
A view of two windows and the skulls of genocide victims in a case below.
Image
The Ntarama Genocide Memorial in Kigali. As many as 800,000 people were killed in 1994.Credit...Jacques Nkinzingabo/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/06/worl ... 778d3e6de3
swamidada
Posts: 1481
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2020 8:59 pm

Re: FORMS OF GOVERNANCE

Post by swamidada »

The New Republic
Opinion
Trump Admits He Only Wants White People to Come to the U.S.
Hafiz Rashid
Mon, April 8, 2024 at 10:19 AM CDT·

Trump is bringing back his “greatest” hits on immigration in his current presidential campaign.

Remember in 2018, when he referred to immigrants from places such as Haiti as “people from shithole countries” and wondered why more immigrants weren’t coming from places like Norway? Well, at a private fundraiser over the weekend, Trump made a callback to those remarks, once again lamenting where immigrants to America come from.

At a multimillion-dollar event in Palm Beach, Florida, Trump complained that immigrants weren’t coming from “nice” countries “like Denmark,” according to The New York Times, which got an account of the event from one attendee. He even suggested that the wealthy guests at the event, hosted at a mansion owned by billionaire John Paulson, weren’t safe from nearby undocumented immigrants.

“These are people coming in from prisons and jails. They’re coming in from just unbelievable places and countries, countries that are a disaster,” Trump said, the Times reported.

“I said [in 2018], you know, ‘Why can’t we allow people to come in from nice countries, I’m trying to be nice,’” he continued, to reported chuckles from the crowd. “Nice countries, you know like Denmark, Switzerland? Do we have any people coming in from Denmark? How about Switzerland? How about Norway?”

The setting of the event was also interesting: Guests were seated outdoors at white-clothed tables under a white tent, looking out over the body of water that separates wealthy Palm Beach (98.3 percent white, according to census estimates) from the more diverse city of West Palm Beach, where nearly a third of the population is Black and almost a quarter is Hispanic.

“In fact, I don’t think they’re on this island, but I know they’re on that island right there. That’s West Palm,” Trump at one point said during his speech, gesturing across the water. “Congratulations over there. But they’ll be here. Eventually, they’ll be here.”

Trump also mentioned immigrants from the Middle East, noting that immigrants were arriving from Yemen, “where they’re blowing each other up all over the place.”

All of Trump’s rhetoric and policies have been based on racism from the time he began seriously campaigning for president in 2015. Who could forget his first campaign speech, after he descended his golden escalator? He claimed that Mexico was “sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”

Trump either fails to realize or refuses to admit that immigrants move to different countries for better lives, For example, his preferred origin for immigrants, Denmark, ranks sixth in the world in the United Nations’ Human Development Index, which is based on factors such as life expectancy, literacy rate, access to electricity, GDP per capita, income inequality, and others. In contrast, the U.S. is ranked twentieth.

https://currently.att.yahoo.com/news/tr ... 13182.html
kmaherali
Posts: 25209
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Re: FORMS OF GOVERNANCE

Post by kmaherali »

‘More and more aligned’

The Houthis, the Iran-backed militia that controls much of Yemen, have disrupted the global economy by firing on commercial ships traveling through the Red Sea. But the Houthis have made some exceptions: Ships from China and Russia are allowed to pass without being attacked.

This policy, formalized with a diplomatic agreement last month, is the latest sign that the world has entered a new period of great power politics. On one side is the largely democratic alliance — including the United States, Japan, South Korea and Western Europe — that has dominated global affairs since the demise of the Soviet Union. On the other side are China, Russia, Iran and North Korea as well as Iran-backed groups like the Houthis.

These authoritarian powers “are more and more aligned,” Jens Stoltenberg, the head of NATO, the Western alliance, told the BBC this week. “They support each other more and more, in very practical ways.”

In today’s newsletter, I’ll explain how the emerging alliance is shaping the world and why experts are anxious about the future.

Money, weapons and propaganda

Over the past decade, the emerging anti-democratic alliance has become bolder and more coordinated. Among the examples:

- In the Ukraine war, China, Iran and North Korea have supplied crucial help to Russia. Iran and North Korea have sent weapons. And China has allowed Russia’s economy to overcome tough sanctions, as my colleague Ana Swanson has detailed. This economic aid offers military benefits, too: China is helping Russia rebuild its military-industrial base after two years of war.
- China and Russia also act as military allies beyond Ukraine. “China and Russia are pursuing the joint development of helicopters, conventional attack submarines, missiles and missile-launch early warning systems,” Hal Brands of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies recently wrote in Foreign Affairs.
- Iran and North Korea resumed their collaboration on missile technology during the Trump administration, according to the U.N. North Korea already has nuclear weapons, and Iran seems to want them.
- During the war in Gaza, Chinese and Russian groups have filled social media with posts supporting Hamas (which, like the Houthis, relies on Iranian support). Many include antisemitic tropes, such as Jewish control of the U.S. “The reason why China chose this moment to take a decisively anti-Israel position is because China regards Israel as a close ally of the West,” Miles Yu of the Hudson Institute told Congress.
- The Houthis have praised Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a global turning point. Ali al-Qahoum, a Houthi leader, said that the invasion had weakened “unipolarity” — a reference to American power — and promoted “multipolarity.”

A person watches as a ship crosses the Suez Canal.
Image
A ship crosses the Suez Canal toward the Red Sea. Mohamed Hossam/EPA, via Shutterstock

Very different values

Al-Qahoum’s line underscores the larger goal of the China-led alliance. Above all, it wants to reduce American influence and allow regional powers to assert their will. China might then be able to take over Taiwan. Russia could again dominate parts of Eastern Europe. Iran could contest Saudi Arabia, a U.S. ally, for sway over the Middle East. (These Times maps, by Alissa Rubin and Lazaro Gamio, explain Iran’s ambitions.)

The countries in the anti-U.S. alliance, Brands wrote, aim “to reorder their regions and, thereby, reorder the world.” As Fumio Kishida, Japan’s prime minister, told Congress yesterday during a visit to Washington, “The international order that the U.S. worked for generations to build is facing new challenges, challenges from those with values and principles very different from ours.”

These other countries obviously have their differences: Iran, for instance, is an Islamic theocracy, while China and Russia have oppressed their own Muslim populations. But the countries nonetheless have overlapping worldviews.

All have authoritarian governments. All have patriarchal societies, with few women in senior roles. All restrict L.G.B.T. rights. None permit a free press. All imprison people, or worse, for criticizing the regime. The countries celebrate their hostility to liberal democracy and want to forge a world with less of it.

What’s next?

One possibility is that the world is entering a new cold war, with two broad alliances competing for power. Sometimes, this competition may lead to actual wars, in which the two alliances support opposite sides — but both take steps to avoid escalation. That describes the situation in Ukraine.

Another possibility is even more alarming: a global war. Noah Smith, writing in his Substack newsletter this week, argued that the chances of such an outcome were higher than many Americans recognized. This war could start either with a major event, such as a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, or almost accidentally.

Imagine if the Houthis killed many Americans in a Red Sea attack or a Russian missile somehow did so in Europe. Experts are especially worried about China’s harassment of Philippine ships in the South China Sea. In a White House meeting yesterday, President Biden discussed the threat with the leaders of the Philippines and Japan.

One problem, as Jim Sciutto of CNN pointed out in his new book, “The Return of Great Powers,” is that the guardrails that helped prevent a past world war seem weaker today. China and the U.S. don’t always communicate as well as Soviet and American officials once did, and proxy forces like the Houthis don’t always heed their sponsors.

The past several decades have included many agonizing problems around the world. Overall, though, it has been a remarkably peaceful period. Global deaths from armed conflicts have fallen to near their lowest levels in six centuries, and global poverty has plummeted. The future looks more frightening.
kmaherali
Posts: 25209
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

India’s 2024 General Election: What to Know

Post by kmaherali »

Why does this election matter?

Indians began voting on Friday in a multiphase general election that will continue until June 1. The vote, whose results will be announced on June 4, will determine the political direction of the world’s most populous nation for the next five years.

The election, for which turnout is usually high, is a mammoth undertaking described as the biggest peacetime logistical exercise anywhere.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose power is well entrenched, is seeking a third term. In his decade at the helm, he has projected himself as a champion of India’s development, trying to address some of the basic failures — like antiquated infrastructure and a lack of clean water and toilets — that have held the country back from reaching its potential as a major power. But his push to reshape India’s secular democracy as a Hindu-first nation has aggravated the religious and ethnic fault lines in the huge, diverse country.

In a region of frequent political turmoil, India is deeply proud of its nearly undisrupted electoral democracy since its founding as a republic more than 75 years ago. While independent institutions have come under assault from Mr. Modi’s efforts to centralize power and the ruling party is seen as having an unfair advantage over political fund-raising, voting in India is still seen as free and fair, and results are generally accepted by candidates. But some opposition groups have raised concerns that electronic voting machines could be vulnerable to tampering.

How does India vote?

India has a parliamentary system of governance. The party or coalition holding a majority of the 543 seats in the lower house of the Parliament gets to form the government and appoint as prime minister one of its winning candidates.

The country has over 960 million eligible voters, about 470 million of them women. Turnout in the previous parliamentary election, in 2019, was 67 percent, the highest ever.

The votes are cast electronically across more than a million polling stations that require about 15 million employees during balloting. To reach every possible voter in Himalayan hamlets and isolated islands, election officials travel by any means possible, in railroads and helicopters, on horseback and boats.

India’s elections are the most expensive in the world, with political parties spending more than $7 billion in the 2019 parliamentary election, according to studies. That spending is expected to double in the current election. In a sign of how much of a factor money is, Indian authorities seized the equivalent of hundreds of millions of dollars before the last parliamentary election — in cash, gold, liquor and drugs — that they said was meant for bribing voters.

Who is running, and who is likely to win?

Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party holds a strong majority in the 543-seat Parliament. The B.J.P. won 303 seats in 2019, and along with its coalition partners enjoyed a majority of 352 seats.

Although Indian elections are known to throw surprises, Mr. Modi’s B.J.P. is well placed to return to power. His party, relentless in trying to expand its base, is rich in cash and has strong election machinery. Mr. Modi has built on it a multipronged approach that offers something for nearly everyone: There is the wider emotional appeal of his Hindu majoritarian ideology for his main base, coupled with a broad range of welfare and infrastructure programs to win new constituencies for the B.J.P.

The opposition has struggled to match Mr. Modi’s appeal.

The Indian National Congress, the main opposition party, ruled India for decades, but it has been reduced to shadow of its former glory in two consecutive national elections. In 2019, it won only 52 seats.

In the lead-up to this parliamentary election, the opposition tried to unite as one bloc. The opposition parties have been brought together by fears that a third term for Mr. Modi, who has jailed many opposition party leaders and bogged down others in investigations, would further marginalize them.

But the opposition has struggled to pitch a cohesive ideological alternative beyond a criticism of Mr. Modi’s divisive politics, and its bickering over seat-sharing in constituencies has often spilled out in messy public fights.

When will we find out the results?

Because of India’s vast geography, the voting for the parliamentary election is happening over seven phases, from the first region casting its vote to the last. Scheduling is a tricky task, entailing trying to find a sweet spot that factors in climate extremes and is considerate of the frequent cultural and religious festivals across India.

After voting is completed on June 1, results will be tallied on June 4 and announced by the end of the day.

Where can I find more information?

Modi’s Power Keeps Growing, and India Looks Sure to Give Him More https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/19/worl ... ction.html

China Had a ‘Special Place’ in Modi’s Heart. Now It’s a Thorn in His Side. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/13/worl ... -modi.html

Modi’s Party Doesn’t Control All of India. But He’s Working on It. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/23/worl ... alism.html

What 10 Years of Modi Rule Has Meant for India’s Economy https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/01/busi ... ction.html

Modi Opens a Giant Temple in a Triumph for India’s Hindu Nationalists https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/22/worl ... emple.html

India Is Passing China in Population. Can Its Economy Ever Do the Same? https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/19/worl ... ation.html

Why Is Narendra Modi So Popular? Tune In to Find Out. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/21/worl ... -baat.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/16/worl ... 778d3e6de3
kmaherali
Posts: 25209
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Re: FORMS OF GOVERNANCE

Post by kmaherali »

Chaos and oppression

Image
Outside Columbia University. Adam Gray for The New York Times

Dueling priorities

Arnold Kling, an economist, published a book a decade ago that offered a way to think about the core difference between progressives and conservatives. Progressives, Kling wrote, see the world as a struggle between the oppressor and the oppressed, and they try to help the oppressed. Conservatives see the world as a struggle between civilization and barbarism — between order and chaos — and they try to protect civilization.

Like many frameworks, Kling’s is a simplification, and it’s easy to find exceptions. But his book has been influential because the framework often sheds light on political arguments.

The debate over pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia and other universities has become an example. If you want to understand why university leaders are finding the situation so hard to resolve, Kling’s dichotomy is useful: The central question for colleges is whether to prioritize the preservation of order or the desire of students to denounce oppression.

In today’s newsletter, I’ll lay out the cases of the dueling sides.

Confronting injustice

A man wearing a kippah on his head that looks like a watermelon.
Image
A Jewish student wearing a watermelon kippah, a symbol of Gaza. Bing Guan for The New York Times

For the student protesters, the injustice in Gaza is so horrific that it takes precedence over almost anything else.

The death toll in Gaza since Oct. 7 is more than 30,000, the Gaza Ministry of Health reports. Entire neighborhoods are rubble. Israel has slowed the entry of basic supplies into Gaza, and many families are hungry. (My colleagues Vivian Yee and Bilal Shbair profiled two families trying to find their children enough to eat.)

The protesters view this suffering as an atrocity that demands action, much as Jim Crow laws, the Vietnam War and South African apartheid did for earlier students. In a statement yesterday, a pro-Palestinian group at Columbia cited as inspiration the anti-Vietnam War demonstrators who were killed at Kent State University in 1970.

If classes must be canceled and graduation ceremonies can’t happen, all the better, the students say. The disruptions will force the world to confront what the protesters describe as a genocide. “Big picture, genocide is happening, and this is where we stand,” one Columbia graduate student told the publication Hell Gate.

Many protesters specifically call for their universities to divest from companies that do business in Israel or help produce military equipment.

Some students have framed the debate as being about free speech, and free-speech principles do play a role. But I don’t think they are as central as Kling’s frame. Both sides, after all, have tried to restrict speech. Supporters of Israel have doxxed pro-Palestinian students and tried to penalize slogans like “From the river to the sea.” Pro-Palestinian protesters have ripped away Israeli and U.S. flags and tried to prevent pro-Israel students from speaking.

The protesters’ abiding principle is not freedom of speech. It is justice for the oppressed.

Preventing chaos

Tents set up in between large university buildings.
Image
The “Gaza Solidarity Encampment.” Bing Guan for The New York Times

For the protesters’ critics, the breakdown of order is the central problem — because a community that descends into chaos can’t function.

Protesters have frequently violated colleges’ rules. They have erected tents in public places and overwhelmed those areas. Columbia has switched to hybrid classes because of the turmoil.

Even worse, some protests have involved harassment and violence. The University of Michigan had to cut short an honors ceremony for students. At Vanderbilt, more than 20 protesters stormed the president’s office, injuring a security guard and shattering a window. At Columbia, videos have shown protesters threatening Jewish students with antisemitic vitriol, including a sign talking about Hamas’s “next targets.”

If universities do not enforce their own rules against such behavior, the rules have no meaning, administrators fear. Other protesters, seeing their own causes as existential, could likewise halt normal life. Perhaps they would be climate activists or students outraged by China’s oppression of Uighurs — or even demonstrators with right-wing views unpopular on American campuses. If anti-abortion protesters were to take over a quad for days, would university administrators ignore their own campus rules?

Jason Riley, a Wall Street Journal columnist, has compared the protesters’ tactics to those of the white residents of Arkansas who tried to use physical intimidation to prevent the enforcement of a law they didn’t like: school desegregation. President Dwight Eisenhower responded by proclaiming that “disorderly mobs” could not triumph, Riley noted.

College administrators are not making such analogies. Many express sympathy for the protesters’ concerns. But some insist that society can’t function if people violate rules without consequence. “We cannot have one group dictate terms and attempt to disrupt important milestones like graduation to advance their point of view,” Minouche Shafik, Columbia’s president, wrote to the campus this week.

What’s next?

I recognize that not everybody will accept Kling’s framework for this debate. Pro-Palestinian students will say that Israel is the true source of disorder, while pro-Israel students will say that Hamas is the true oppressor.

Still, I think the Kling dichotomy captures the dilemma that university leaders face. The protests continue, and graduation season is approaching. Those leaders will have to make difficult decisions about what values to prioritize.

NYTimes Newletter
kmaherali
Posts: 25209
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Re: FORMS OF GOVERNANCE

Post by kmaherali »

Chad Election 2024: What to Know

Why does this election matter?

Chad’s election on May 6 appears to offer voters a choice. But it’s been masterminded, analysts say, to produce a single outcome: to rubber-stamp the rule of the incumbent, Mahamat Idriss Déby, who is seeking to transform himself from military leader to civilian president.

Mr. Déby seized power three years ago after his father, Idriss Déby, who ruled Chad with an iron fist for three decades, was killed — apparently on the battlefield, fighting rebels trying to overthrow his government. His son’s succession to the presidency was a clear violation of the country’s Constitution.

Chad is a landlocked, arid country of 18 million people in Central Africa. Despite its wealth of natural resources, it is one of the world’s poorest nations.

Nevertheless, it is sheltering hundreds of thousands of refugees from the war in neighboring Sudan.

Chad is also part of a belt of African countries to have experienced coups in the past four years, stretching from coast to coast.

And it’s the first of the junta-led countries to hold an election. Mali’s government keeps delaying its promised vote. Last year Burkina Faso’s military president, Ibrahim Traore, indefinitely postponed an election planned for July 2024, saying it was “not a priority.” There is no end in sight for Guinea’s supposedly transitional government.

Chad has built a reputation as a dependable security partner for Western countries in their fight against Islamist militants, at a time when other countries are pushing out Western allies. It’s hosting hundreds of French troops after they were kicked out of neighboring Niger, and some American ones.

But some American troops are leaving after a letter from Chad’s Air Force chief ordered them to stop activities on an air base in the capital, Ndjamena, U.S. officials said recently — at least until after the election.

Who is running?

Mr. Déby — known by his nickname, Kaka — was supposed to be an interim leader, and promised not to run — but he’s at the top of the ballot. He is a four-star general who trained in Chad and France, and has three wives and many children.

His prime minister, Succès Masra, is also a candidate. Mr. Masra used to be the country’s best-known opposition leader and was living in exile until last year. But then he returned, made a deal with Mr. Déby and, since January, has led his government. Mr. Masra used to have considerable support but now many Chadians view him as a sellout.

Eight other candidates have been approved to run — but two key opposition leaders, Nassour Ibrahim Neguy Koursami and Rakhis Ahmat Saleh, were barred after the country’s constitutional council said there were “irregularities,” including allegations of forgery by Mr. Koursami. But most observers said they thought the council’s findings were politically motivated.

The other name absent from the ballot is that of Yaya Dillo, who had been the foremost opposition leader. In February, he was shot dead by security forces at his party’s headquarters — an assassination, his party said. Before that, dozens of protesters were killed in pro-democracy rallies.

When will we find out the results?

About a week after the election. If it goes to a runoff, that is to be held on June 22.

Who is going to win?

There has never been a free and fair election in Chad, and this one looks set to continue in that tradition. Analysts say the only path to Mr. Deby’s losing power is through a coup d’état.

But even if he wins the vote, don’t make the mistake of thinking he’s popular, said Lynda Iroulo, a scholar of international relations at Georgetown University in Qatar. Despite a conspicuous absence of elections, she said the juntas in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger enjoy considerably more popularity than Chad’s.

“Most of them have had some level of mass support,” she said, largely because they are trying to “cut off the French influence in their countries.”

Thousands of people have rallied in support of the juntas in each country. Not so in Chad. Nevertheless, Mr. Déby has made sure that no candidate with enough support to defeat him will participate.

“My whole life, I haven’t seen any change occurring,” said Julia Bealoum, a student in Ndjamena. “I think things will continue as before.”

What are the geopolitical factors?

Chad has not faced the same wave of international condemnation that followed the coups and democratic backsliding in other African countries. The African Union did not suspend Chad’s membership after the coup, or when Mr. Déby backtracked on his pledge not to run. When Mr. Dillo — the opposition leader — was killed, the United States and France said nothing.

President Emmanuel Macron of France even sent his special envoy to Ndjamena 10 days after Mr. Dillo’s death, to offer his “admiration” for the electoral process.

It was a far cry from the condemnation that met the coups in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger — or their juntas’ subsequent failure to hold elections.

Many voters in Chad feel that Western countries call the shots, and are highly critical of France despite the two governments’ close relationship.

“I don’t think it’s possible for a country like Chad to organize a transparent election, because we are ruled by Western powers, especially France, who just look after their own interests,” said Richard Djitaingar, the owner of a small cellphone shop in Ndjamena.

Where can I find more information?

U.S. to Withdraw Troops From Chad, Dealing Another Blow to Africa Policy https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/p ... rawal.html

Opposition Leader in Chad Is Killed in a Shootout Months Before Elections https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/29/worl ... illed.html

Talking Peace in Sudan, the U.A.E. Secretly Fuels the Fight https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/29/worl ... -chad.html

Security Forces Open Fire on Protesters in Chad, Killing at Least 50 https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/21/worl ... tests.html

Mahamat Adamou contributed reporting from Ndjamena, Chad.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/30/worl ... -2024.html
kmaherali
Posts: 25209
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Re: FORMS OF GOVERNANCE

Post by kmaherali »

Why the Protests Help Trump

Image
Police officers and protesters near the City College of New York in Manhattan.Credit...Spencer Platt/Getty Images

These days, I think a lot about Donald Trump. When the monthly economic reports come out, I think: Will this help elect Donald Trump? And, I confess, I’ve started to ask myself the same question when I look at the current unrest on American college campuses over Israel and Gaza.

Now, I should say that I assume that most of the protesters are operating with the best of intentions — to ease the suffering being endured by the Palestinian people.

But protests have unexpected political consequences. In the 1960s, for example, millions of young people were moved to protest the war in Vietnam, and history has vindicated their position. But Republicans were quick to use the excesses of the student protest movement to their advantage. In 1966, Ronald Reagan vowed “to clean up the mess at Berkeley” and was elected governor of California. In 1968, Richard Nixon celebrated the “forgotten Americans — the nonshouters; the nondemonstrators” and was elected to the presidency. Far from leading to a new progressive era, the uprisings of the era were followed by what was arguably the most conservative period in American history.

This kind of popular backlash is not uncommon. For his latest book, “If We Burn,” the progressive journalist Vincent Bevins investigated 10 protest movements that occurred between 2010 and 2020 in places like Egypt, Turkey, Brazil, Ukraine and Hong Kong. He concluded that in seven of those cases, the results were “worse than failure. Things went backward.”

In Egypt in 2011, for example, about a million protesters gathered in Tahrir Square, thrilling the world with their calls for reforms and freedom. President Hosni Mubarak was toppled, but democracy did not replace his autocratic rule; the Muslim Brotherhood did.

In June 2013, millions of Brazilians took to the streets demanding better schools, cheaper public transportation and political reform. But, Bevins laments, “just a few years later, the country would be ruled by the most radically right-wing elected leader in the world, a man who openly called for a return to dictatorship and mass violence” — the über-Trumpian figure Jair Bolsonaro.

Why do these popular uprisings so often backfire? In his book, Bevins points to flaws in the way the protesters organize themselves. He notes that there are a few ways you can structure movements. The first is the Leninist way, in which power is concentrated in the supreme leader and his apparatus. Or there is the method used by the American civil rights movement, in which a network of hierarchically organized institutions work together for common ends, with clear leaders and clear followers.

Then there’s the kind of movement we have in the age of the internet. Many of these protesters across the globe are suspicious of vertical lines of authority; they don’t want to be told what to do by self-appointed leaders. They prefer leaderless, decentralized, digitally coordinated crowds, in which participants get to improvise their own thing.

This horizontal, anarchic method enables masses of people to mobilize quickly, even if they don’t know one another. It is, however, built on the shaky assumption that if lots of people turn out, then somehow the movement will magically meet its goals.

Unfortunately, an unorganized, decentralized movement is going to be good at disruption but not good at building a new reality. As Bevins puts it, “A diffuse group of individuals who come out to the streets for very different reasons cannot simply take power themselves.” Instead groups that have traditional organizational structures, like the strongman populists, rise up vowing to end the anarchy and restore order.

Today’s campus protesters share this weakness. When you have no formal organizational structure, you can’t control the message. The most outlandish comments — “Zionists don’t deserve to live” — get attention. When you have no formal organizational structure, you can’t be clear on basic positions. Does the movement, for example, believe in a two-state solution, or does it want to eliminate Israel and ethnically cleanse the region?

Worse, the protests reinforce the class dynamics that have undermined the Democratic Party’s prospects over the past few decades. As is well known, the Democrats have become the party of the educated and cultural elite, and the Republicans have become the party of the less educated masses. Students who attend places like Columbia and the University of Southern California are in the top echelons of cultural privilege.

If you operate in highly educated circles, it’s easy to get the impression that young people are passionately engaged in the Gaza issue. But a recent Harvard Youth Poll asked Americans ages 18 to 29 which issues mattered to them most. “Israel/Palestine” ranked 15th out of 16 issues listed. Other issues like inflation, jobs, housing, health care and gun violence were much more pressing to most young Americans.

Especially since 2016, it’s become clear that if you live in a university town or in one of the many cities along the coasts where highly educated people tend to congregate, you can’t use your own experience to generalize about American politics. In fact, if you are guided by instincts and values honed in such places, you may not be sensitive to the ways your movement is alienating voters in the working-class areas of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Georgia. You may come across to them as privileged kids breaking the rules and getting away with it.

Over the past few decades, many universities have become more ideologically homogeneous and detached from the rest of the country. As my colleague Ross Douthat noted recently, Columbia students who study 20th-century thought in the “core curriculum” are fed a steady diet of writers like Frantz Fanon and Michel Foucault from one ideological perspective.

Writing in The Atlantic, George Packer quoted a letter that one Columbia student wrote to one of his professors: “I think universities have essentially stopped minding the store, stopped engaging in any kind of debate or even conversation with the ideologies which have slowly crept into every bit of university life, without enough people of good conscience brave enough to question all the orthodoxies. So if you come to Columbia believing in ‘decolonization’ or what have you, it’s genuinely not clear to me that you will ever have to reflect on this belief.”

These circles have become so insular that today’s progressive fights tend to take place within progressive spaces, with progressive young protesters attempting to topple slightly less progressive university presidents or organization heads. These fights invariably divide the left and unify the right.

Over my career as a journalist, I’ve learned that when you’re covering a rally, pay attention not just to protesters; pay attention to all those people who would never attend and are quietly disapproving. If you were covering the protests of the late 1960s, for example, you would have learned a lot more about the coming decades by interviewing George W. Bush than you would have by interviewing one of the era’s protest celebrities like Abbie Hoffman. Hoffman was more photogenic in the moment, but Bush, and all those turned off by the protests, would turn out to be more consequential.

Over the past few days, the White House and Senator Chuck Schumer have become more critical of lawbreaking protests. They probably need to do a lot more of that if we’re going to avoid “Trump: The Sequel.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/opin ... 778d3e6de3
Post Reply