For democracy, it’s a time of swimming against the tide

In this Nov. 4, 2016 file photo, children swing in a park next to an election billboard for President Daniel Ortega and his running mate, his wife, Rosario Murillo in Managua, (AP)
Short Url
Updated 12 July 2021
Follow

For democracy, it’s a time of swimming against the tide

  • The late 20th and early 21st centuries saw country after country transition to democratic rule

The old Nicaraguan revolutionary, with his receding hairline and the goatee that he had finally let turn grey, spoke calmly into the camera as police swarmed toward his house, hidden behind a high wall in a leafy Managua neighborhood. Surveillance drones, he said, were watching overhead.
Decades earlier, Hugo Torres had been a revered guerrilla in the fight against right-wing dictator Anastasio Somoza. In 1974, he’d taken a group of top officials hostage, then traded them for the release of imprisoned comrades. Among those prisoners was Daniel Ortega, a Marxist bank robber who would become Nicaragua’s elected president and later its authoritarian ruler.
And on this hot Sunday in mid-June, amid a weekslong clampdown to obliterate nearly every hint of opposition, Ortega had his old savior arrested.
“History is on our side,” Torres said in the video, which was quickly uploaded onto social media. “The end of the dictatorship is close.”
But history — at least recent history — is not on Torres’ side. In the last few months, the growing ranks of dictators have flexed their muscles, and freedom has been in retreat.
The list is grim: a draconian crackdown in Nicaragua, with laws that now let the government paint nearly any critic as a traitor; a military takeover in Myanmar, with bloody repression that the United Nations says has left more than 850 people dead since Feb. 1 and more than 4,800 arbitrarily detained; a tightening grip by Beijing on Hong Kong, the semi-autonomous enclave where activists and journalists have been harassed and imprisoned under a sweeping national security law.
In mid-June, Hong Kong’s last remaining pro-democracy newspaper shut down operations after police froze $2.3 million of its assets and arrested five top editors and executives, accusing them of foreign collusion.
“Why does it have to end up like this?” asked an Apple Daily graphic designer, Dickson Ng.
The backsliding of democracy, though, goes back far before 2021, with a long string of countries where democratic rule has been abandoned or dialed back, or where democratically elected leaders now make no secret of their authoritarianism.
2020 was “another year of decline for liberal democracy,” said a recent report from the V-Dem Institute, a Sweden-based research center. “The world is still more democratic than it was in the 1970s and 1980s, but the global decline in liberal democracy has been steep during the past 10 years.”
Countries like Sweden, Germany and the United States can seem like democratic outliers in a world increasingly dominated by authoritarian leaders.
“It’s an open question if we as a democratic grouping can push back against the Russias or the Chinas of the world and `win’ the 21st century,” said Torrey Taussig, a scholar of authoritarianism and great power politics at the Harvard Kennedy School. “Can the democracies rally to push back against this authoritarian tide that we’ve seen resurgent?”
It wasn’t supposed to be like this.
The late 20th and early 21st centuries saw country after country transition to democratic rule. The Soviet Union collapsed amid Mikhail Gorbachev’s attempts at political and economic reform. Eastern European nations that had long been controlled by Moscow became independent. In Latin America, decades of military dictatorships gave way to elected governments. A wave of democratization swept across Africa, from South Africa to Nigeria to Ghana.
“We had the largest number of democracies that ever existed in the world. It was unparalleled,” said Sheri Berman, a political science professor at Barnard College, Columbia University. “It seemed that liberal democracy was the way of the future.”
But within just a few years the cracks began to show.
Maybe the world was just too optimistic. Democracy is messy.
“It takes a lot to make democracy work,” said Berman. “Getting rid of the dictators is not the end. It’s the beginning.”
As a result, many scholars aren’t too surprised when countries like Nicaragua or Myanmar stumble into authoritarianism. Both are very poor, with little history of democracy.
Hard times and turmoil are mother’s milk for authoritarians.
Russia’s experiment with democracy, for example, was short lived after the collapse of the Soviet Union. A plunging standard of living, a weak leader in Boris Yeltsin, thug businessmen and budding oligarchs fighting for control of state-owned businesses opened the way for Vladimir Putin.
Then came the financial crisis of 2007-2008, which began in the US and rippled around the world. In the US, banks teetered on the verge of collapse and top officials worried about another Great Depression. In the European Union, America’s troubles helped lead to a debt crisis that sucked in Greece, Ireland and other nations that needed outside economic bailouts.
Those financial troubles, combined later with the political firestorms of the Trump administration and years of angry negotiations over Britain’s exit from the European Union, made liberal democracy look risky.
“The more attractive the US and Europe looks, the better that is for the folks fighting for democracy,” said Berman. And the opposite is also true.
Frustration has grown, with a 2019 Pew Research Center survey of 34 countries showing a median of 64 percent of people believing elected officials don’t care about them.
Today, a man like Viktor Orban can look very attractive to many voters.
Orban, the nationalist Hungarian prime minister who returned to power in the wake of the financial crisis, feeding on an electorate that distrusted the traditional elite, spoke proudly of leading an “illiberal democracy.”
He now talks about Hungary’s “system of national cooperation,” a process that has hobbled the court system, re-written the constitution and given immense power to himself and his party. The country’s media is largely now a factory producing pro-Orban content.
Rival parties are regularly investigated by government auditors and sometimes fined to the brink of bankruptcy.
“We have replaced a shipwrecked liberal democracy with a 21st-century Christian democracy,” Orban proudly told lawmakers after a landslide 2018 election victory.
The world has a string of such leaders.
Some are authoritarians of varying degrees of power, from Putin in Russia to Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey to Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines. Others are in the politically foggy wilderness between a one-party state and a solid democracy, like Jaroslaw Kaczynski, who runs the ruling party in Poland and Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, whose father ruled the country for three decades and turned it into an affluent city-state.
The pandemic has sped up a democratic decline in Africa, scholars say, with elections postponed or opposition figures silenced from Ethiopia to Zimbabwe.
But in a world where democracy is often swimming against the political tide, scholars also see some good news. It just requires a longer view of history.
Eighty years ago, there were perhaps 12 fully functioning democracies. Today, the Democracy Index put out by the Economist Intelligence Unit says there are 23 full democracies, and nearly half the planet lives in some form of democracy.
Then there are the protesters, perhaps the most visible sign of a thirst for democratic rule.
Thousands of Russians flooded the streets earlier this year after opposition leader Alexei Navalny was imprisoned. Neighboring Belarus was shaken by months of protests sparked by the 2020 reelection of President Alexander Lukashenko, which were widely seen as rigged. Political protests are common in Poland and Hungary.
Such protests regularly fail. The demonstrations in Russia and Belarus, for instance, ended with heavy-handed crackdowns.
But political scientists say even suppressed protests can be important political sparks.
Plus, sometimes they succeed.
In Sudan, 2019 mass protests against the autocratic president, Omar Al-Bashir, led to his ouster by the military. The country is now on a fragile path to democracy, ruled by a transitional government.
In a recent report, the US-based rights watchdog Freedom House, saw signs of hope in the European Union’s sanctions against the Belarusian regime, exile Central Asian journalists and bloggers continuing their work from overseas, and the way a string of eastern European governments have slowed business ties with China, concerned about transparency and national security. Meanwhile, Hungary’s Orban faced surprisingly united opposition.
Some scholars also see hope in the way President Joe Biden has reached out to America’s longtime European allies, reversing the approach of the Trump administration.
Biden’s recent trip to Europe, said Taussig, the Harvard Kennedy School scholar, was “an attempt to rally America’s democratic partners” against the authoritarian tide.
So maybe that old, arrested Nicaraguan revolutionary does have reason for optimism.
“These are the desperate blows of a regime that feels itself dying,” Torres said in the video before his arrest.
Maybe. As summer wore on, he remained in prison.


Biden: What’s happening in Gaza is not genocide

Updated 21 May 2024
Follow

Biden: What’s happening in Gaza is not genocide

US President Joe Biden strongly defended Israel on Monday, saying Israeli forces are not committing genocide in their military campaign against Hamas militants in Gaza.

“What’s happening in Gaza is not genocide,” Biden said at a Jewish American Heritage Month event at the White House.


Trump trial prosecution rests, closing arguments next week

Updated 21 May 2024
Follow

Trump trial prosecution rests, closing arguments next week

NEW YORK: Approximately five weeks, 19 witnesses, reams of documents and a dash of salacious testimony later, the prosecution up against Donald Trump rested its case Monday, handing over to the defense before closing arguments set for next week.

The defense called its first witness, the paralegal of Trump lawyer Todd Blanche, to kick off their case that sees the former president accused of covering up hush money payments to a porn star over an alleged encounter that could have derailed his 2016 White House bid.

Monday featured extended quibbling among the legal teams that, along with the upcoming holiday weekend, means closing arguments that the judge had hoped could start Tuesday are now set for next week.

The defense then called lawyer Robert Costello, who was not a potential witness until Cohen testified at length about exchanges with him.

Trump’s team wanted to question him about the credibility of Cohen, who he has assailed in the past.

The door also remains open for Trump to take the stand, a highly risky move.

Experts doubt he will opt to testify — there’s no requirement to — in his criminal trial, the first ever of a former US president, as it would expose him to unnecessary legal jeopardy and forensic cross-examination by prosecutors.

But Blanche has raised the prospect his client could step up as a witness.

On Monday, Blanche finished his third day of questioning Cohen after hours of at times digressive, at other times bruising, exchanges.

Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyer turned tormentor, recounted last week how he kept Trump informed about $130,000 paid to porn star Stormy Daniels to buy her silence about an alleged affair ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

Trump’s lawyers set out to paint Cohen as a convicted criminal and habitual liar, recalling his time in prison for tax fraud and lying to Congress.

Blanche also probed Cohen’s loyalty to Trump and then to the prosecution, looking to show jurors that the former fixer is self-serving and willing to go to great lengths to accomplish his aims.

Blanche vied to goad Cohen, who has a reputation for a short temper that could have hurt him on the stand — but the witness largely maintained his composure, dulling the questioning at moments by voicing confusion or nonchalance.

Cohen’s story has generally lined up with Daniels and David Pecker, the tabloid boss who said he worked with Trump and Cohen to suppress negative coverage during the Republican’s 2016 White House run.

After Blanche finished with him the prosecution returned for redirect, with prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asking what the whole experience has meant for him.

“My entire life has been turned upside down,” Cohen said, genuine emotion in his voice. “I lost my law license, my financial security... my family’s happiness... just to name a few.”

Trump meanwhile has complained his 2024 election campaign for another White House term is being stymied by the weeks-long court proceedings, which he has to attend every day.

He did so again Monday, complaining to journalists that he’s “not allowed to have anything to do with politics because I’m sitting in a very freezing cold, dark room for the last four weeks. It’s very unfair.”

Branding the case as politicized, a coterie of leading Republicans have stood in the wings behind him as he gives remarks to reporters outside the courtroom.

The growing list includes several lawmakers eyeing Trump’s vice presidential pick, including Ohio Senator JD Vance and North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum.

The defense also hopes to bring in an election campaign finance expert but calling of that witness was under dispute.

The prosecution has voiced opposition, saying only the judge should explain how the law applies.

When the jury begins deliberating, the often juicy testimony will likely linger — but they will also have stacks of documents to consider.

The charges hinge on financial records, and whether falsifying them was done with intent to sway the 2016 presidential vote.


Biden slams ‘outrageous’ ICC bid to arrest Israeli leaders

Updated 20 May 2024
Follow

Biden slams ‘outrageous’ ICC bid to arrest Israeli leaders

WASHINGTON: US President Joe Biden on Monday condemned an “outrageous” request by the International Criminal Court’s prosecutor for an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

As Washington moved to defend its key ally, Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned that the Hague-based court’s move could harm ceasefire talks to end the Gaza conflict.

ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan is seeking arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, as well as top Hamas leaders, on suspicion of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

“The ICC prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders is outrageous” Biden said in a statement.

“And let me be clear: Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence — none — between Israel and Hamas.”

He added that the United States “will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.”

Neither the United States nor Israel is a member of the ICC, which was set up in 2002 as a court of last resort for the world’s worst crimes.

Asked whether Biden backed ICC arrest warrants for Hamas’s leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, and political chief Ismail Haniyeh, White House spokesman John Kirby said “we don’t believe the ICC has jurisdiction in this matter.”

Biden’s expression of support for Netanyahu over the ICC bid comes despite recent tensions over Israel’s war in Gaza in response to Hamas’s October 7 attack.

Washington recently withheld a shipment of bombs to Israel in a bid to it warn off an offensive in the southern city of Rafah.

Blinken said the United States “fundamentally rejects” the ICC prosecutor’s arrest bid.

“We reject the prosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas. It is shameful,” Blinken said.

Blinken added that “this decision does nothing to help, and could jeopardize, ongoing efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement that would get hostages out and surge humanitarian assistance in.”

US lawmakers were reportedly considering a legislative response punishing the ICC, amid bipartisan fury among Republicans and Democrats.

Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson slammed the court’s “baseless and illegitimate” decision.

He accused Biden of a “pressure campaign” against Israel, saying the country was “fighting a just war for survival.”

Biden faces political pressure on both sides ahead of a November election clash with Donald Trump, with pro-Gaza student protests roiling US campuses while Republicans accuse him of failing to fully back Israel.

The White House has previously refused to comment on whether the US could take retaliatory action including sanctions against the ICC if it targeted Israel.

In 2020, the administration of then-president Donald Trump targeted the ICC with sanctions over its investigation into Afghanistan, but the Biden administration later lifted them.

However Washington’s ambiguous position over the court is reflected by the fact that it has backed the ICC’s attempt to prosecute Russian President Vladimir Putin over the invasion of Ukraine.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Monday that the United States will keep assisting the ICC on its investigation into alleged war crimes in Ukraine despite denouncing the Israel move.

“Regarding the question of whether or not we will continue to provide support to the ICC with respect to crimes that are committed in Ukraine, yes, we continue that work,” Austin told reporters.


Russia fails in rival UN bid on nuclear, other weapons in space

Updated 20 May 2024
Follow

Russia fails in rival UN bid on nuclear, other weapons in space

UNITED NATIONS: A Russian-drafted United Nations Security Council resolution that called on all countries to prevent “for all time” the placement, threat or use of any weapons in outer space failed on Monday with the 15-member body split over the move.

The draft failed to get the minimum nine votes needed: seven members voted in favor and seven against, while one abstained. A veto can only be cast by the United States, Russia, China, Britain or France if a draft gets at least nine votes.

Russia put forward the text after it vetoed a US-drafted resolution last month that called on countries to prevent an arms race in outer space. The Russian veto prompted the United States to question whether Moscow was hiding something.

“We are here today because Russia seeks to distract global attention from its development of a new satellite carrying a nuclear device,” deputy US Ambassador Robert Wood told the Security Council before the vote.

He also accused Russia of launching a satellite on Thursday into low Earth orbit that the US “assesses is likely a counterspace weapon presumably capable of attacking other satellites in low Earth orbit.”

“Russia deployed this new counterspace weapon into the same orbit as a US government satellite,” said Wood, adding that the May 16 launch followed Russian satellite launches “likely of counterspace systems to low Earth orbit” in 2019 and 2022.

Russia’s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia responded: “I didn’t even fully understand what he was talking about.”

The 1967 Outer Space Treaty already bars signatories – including Russia and the United States – from placing “in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction.”

Washington has accused Moscow of developing an anti-satellite nuclear weapon to put in space, an allegation that Russia has denied. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Moscow was against putting nuclear weapons in space.

Nebenzia said the Russian draft resolution covered both weapons of mass destruction and all forms of other weapons and was aimed at stopping an arms race in outer space.

But, when pressed by Nebenzia, Wood took issue with language in the draft seeking “a lengthy binding mechanism that cannot be verified,” saying, “I’ve seen this movie before.”

The Russian draft had language echoing a 2008 proposal by Moscow and Beijing for a treaty banning “any weapons in outer space” and threats “or use of force against outer space objects,” but the diplomatic effort did not find international support. 


Amal Clooney advised ICC prosecutor who seeks warrants in Israel-Hamas war crimes case

British Lebanese human rights lawyer Amal Clooney. (File/AFP)
Updated 20 May 2024
Follow

Amal Clooney advised ICC prosecutor who seeks warrants in Israel-Hamas war crimes case

  • British Lebanese human rights lawyer says she agreed to serve on panel of experts reviewing evidence because she believes in rule of law and ‘need to protect civilian lives’

LONDON: British Lebanese human rights lawyer Amal Clooney was a special adviser in the International Criminal Court investigation that resulted in the prosecutor in the case requesting arrest warrants on Monday for Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and three Hamas leaders.

The ICC’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, thanked Clooney in his statement announcing his decision, describing her as part of “a panel of experts in international law” who reviewed the evidence.

In a message on her foundation’s website, Clooney said Khan had requested that she assist him “with evaluating evidence of suspected war crimes and crimes against humanity in Israel and Gaza.”

She added: “I agreed and joined a panel of international legal experts to undertake this task. Together we have engaged in an extensive process of evidence review and legal analysis, including at the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

“Despite our diverse personal backgrounds, our legal findings are unanimous. We have unanimously determined that the Court has jurisdiction over crimes committed in Palestine and by Palestinian nationals.

“We unanimously conclude that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, including hostage-taking, murder and crimes of sexual violence.

“We unanimously conclude that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, including starvation as a method of warfare, murder, persecution and extermination.”

Clooney previously faced criticism for failing to publicly criticize the war in Gaza. Many people sent messages to her on social media on Monday apologizing for their comments and praising her role in the ICC investigation.

The lawyer said she agreed to serve on the panel because she believes in the rule of law and the “need to protect civilian lives.”

She added: “The law that protects civilians in war was developed more than 100 years ago and it applies in every country in the world, regardless of the reasons for a conflict.

“As a human rights lawyer, I will never accept that one child’s life has less value than another’s. I do not accept that any conflict should be beyond the reach of the law, nor that any perpetrator should be above the law. So I support the historic step that the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has taken to bring justice to victims of atrocities in Israel and Palestine.”

Israeli and Hamas leaders have rejected allegations that they are guilty of war crimes, and representatives of both sides criticized Khan for his decision.