Tag Archives: presidency

Populist millionaire faces ex-rebel for Colombia presidency

BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — Leftist Sen. Gustavo Petro celebrated his first-round lead in Colombia’s presidential election in the way most politicians would: in a conference room packed with hundreds of supporters as confetti rained down upon him.

The man he’ll meet in a June 19 runoff had a different approach.

Rodolfo Hernandez sat at his home kitchen table and spoke to his followers for five minutes on Facebook Live.

“Today the country that does not want to continue with the same politicians, that does not want the same people who have brought us to our current situation, has won,” he declared.

The 77-year-old populist rode a wave of disgust at the country’s condition to what until just weeks ago would have been a shocking place in the runoff, surging late in the campaign past more conventional candidates.

He ran an austere campaign — unaffiliated with any major party — that was waged mostly on social media with a message that centered on reducing corruption and cutting wasteful government spending,

He is now positioned to mount a serious challenge to Petro —a former rebel who himself has long been seen as a political insurgent and who would be Colombia’s first leftist leader if elected. Petro now, to some eyes at least seems like the more conventional candidate — even if he still frightens much of the country’s conservative establishment..

Hernandez got 28% of the vote in the six-candidate field on Sunday while Petro, as polls had projected, got 40%.

Hernandez is a self-made millionaire who got rich in real estate after growing up on a small farm. He says he has paid for his campaign with his own savings rather than depending on donations.

Some in Colombia compare him to former U.S. President Donald Trump and describe him as a right-wing populist. But others say the analogy is deceptive.

“This is not a hard right-wing candidate” said Will Freeman, a Princeton University scholar who specializes in Latin American politics and met with Hernandez in February for a lengthy interview. “One of the big things he talks about is poverty, inequality and hunger. When I spoke with him he said several times that he was dismayed by the idea that people are born into poverty in Colombia and don’t have opportunities to get out of that track.”

Hernandez has also said he is in favor of peace negotiations with the National Liberation Army — the last remaining sizable rebel group — which kidnapped and killed his daughter in 2004.

Freeman said that during the interview, Hernandez also expressed admiration for two other Latin American leaders: Mexico’s Andrés Manuel López Obrador and El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele — both often seen as heavy-handed populists but neither of them coming from a right wing background.

Hernandez got his start in politics in 2016, by running for mayor of his hometown of Bucaramanga. He has said he was tired of complaining about corrupt local officials and was convinced by his brother, who is a philosopher, to try to change how the city was run himself.

Leading a movement called “Logic, Ethics and Aesthetics” — which had the pi symbol as its logo — Hernandez won, and eventually left office in 2019, with approval ratings above 80%.

But his mayoral term was also marred by an investigation into allegations he took kickbacks from a waste disposal contractor. Hernandez denies the accusations and is fighting them in court.

As mayor, Hernandez became famous for publicly scolding police officers who sought bribes and notorious for slapping a city councilman who accused his son of corruption. Hernandez was suspended for several months over the incident. He also caused an uproar by saying that migrant women from neighboring Venezuela had become “factories for breeding poor children.”

He astonished Colombians in 2016 when, in a radio interview, he professed to be an admirer of Adolf Hitler. He later apologized and said he had meant to say Albert Einstein — a bizarre confusion that actually made sense because the physicist was the source of the statement that Hernández had misattributed to the dictator during the interview.

But the scandals have not appeared to affect Hernandez’s standing with voters hungry for change in a country struggling to recover economically from the pandemic and to overcome persistent violence.

Inflation in Colombia is the highest in two decades, the poverty rate rose by 8% in 2020, and armed groups continue to fight in some rural areas over territory abandoned by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia after that group signed a peace deal with the government in 2016.

Many Colombians blame these problems on the conservative parties that have been ruling the country for decades. In Sunday’s election, Federico Gutierrez, the candidate backed by the nation’s traditional parties only got 22% of votes.

“The success of Hernandez and Petro is a harsh rebuke to the ruling class” said Sergio Guzman, director of the Colombia Risk Analysis consulting firm. “It also means that Colombians want a radical version of change.”

Guzman said that with just three weeks until the run-off vote, Hernandez is well positioned to win over voters who supported Gutierrez but fear Petro’s economic proposals, which include higher taxes, reforms to the pension system and more government spending. Gutierrez on Sunday said he would back Hernandez because he didnt’ want to “put Colombia’s future at risk.”

As a presidential candidate Hernandez has said he will cut government excesses, starting with a plan to turn the nation’s presidential palace into a museum. Hernandez has also said that he wants to sell buildings owned by Colombia’s diplomatic missions abroad to fund loans for Colombian students.

The candidate has railed against the nation’s ruling class and promised rewards for citizens who denounce corrupt public officials. He has also said that judges would have to present him with reports on how anti-corruption cases were advancing. And much like Petro, he has said that he wants to renegotiate Colombia’s trade agreements with other countries, in order to benefit local farmers.

Laura Gil a political scientist at Bogota’s Javeriana University said that many of Hernandez’s proposals are unfeasible and demonstrate he is a populist with “very little knowledge” of how government works.

“He is a Colombian Trump” Gil said, adding that if Hernandez wins he will take Colombia’s democratic institutions “to the limit.”

Read original article here

Ex-Somali leader Mohamud wins presidency to face war and drought

  • Lawmakers choose Hassan Sheikh Mohamud for president
  • Vote takes place behind barricades due to conflict
  • Former education campaigner Mohamud, 66, faces Islamist war

MOGADISHU, May 16 (Reuters) – Former Somali leader Hassan Sheikh Mohamud won the presidency again in voting by parliamentarians on Sunday in an airport hangar protected by blast walls from Islamist insurgents whom he must now fight for a second time.

The 66-year-old, who ruled from 2012 to 2017, reversed the previous election to defeat incumbent President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed by 214-110 votes in a third-round runoff whose result was confirmed around midnight.

“We have to move ahead, we do not need grudges. No avenging,” Mohamud said in his acceptance speech from the airport compound in the capital Mogadishu patrolled by African Union (AU) peacekeepers.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Supporters defied a curfew to pour onto the streets of Mogadishu, cheering and firing guns into the air.

The former education campaigner and peace activist faces a daunting task in the nation of 15 million people which is suffering its worst drought in four decades and has endured seemingly never-ending conflict since 1991.

Though just holding the election was a success of sorts, many Somalis were sceptical of any real improvement.

Most of the 36 candidates were old faces recycled from the past who had done little to stem war and corruption, they complained. Votes are anyway influenced more by money changing hands than political platforms, Somalis and analysts say.

“Hassan Sheikh is not good but he is the lesser of the two evils. We hope Somalia will be better,” said Halima Nur, a mother-of-four in Mogadishu.

“We hope this time Hassan Sheikh Mohamud will improve and become a better leader. We hope Somalia will be peaceful, though this may take time,” said student Mohamed Ismail.

‘A VERY TEDIOUS TASK’

The United Nations-backed vote was delayed by more than a year due to squabbling in government, but had to be held this month to ensure a $400 million International Monetary Fund programme.

During the first round of voting, blasts from mortar shells rang out near the site but did not disrupt proceedings. There was no claim of responsibility, but Somalis are used to attacks on state institutions from al Shabaab militants.

Somalia has endured conflict and clan battles with no strong central government since the fall of dictator Mohamed Siad Barre in 1991. The government has little control beyond the capital and the AU contingent guards an Iraq-style “Green Zone”.

“Let us pray for the new president, it is a very tedious task,” said outgoing leader Mohamed, known as “Farmaajo” due to a reputed love of Italian formaggio cheese.

He drew criticism from Somalis and foreign donors for trying to extend his tenure last year.

After long bouts of infighting within government, sometimes spilling over into gun battles between factions of the security forces, the incoming leader sought to strike a new note.

“We cannot forget the painful past but we can forgive,” said Mohamud. “Here in this hall I had handed over the presidency to Farmaajo in 2017 and tonight he handed over to me.”

Born in the Hiran region of central Somalia, Mohamud has a master’s degree in technical education from India’s Barkatullah University. He co-founded the SIMAD university in Mogadishu.

Though credited with pushing al Shabaab out of some towns when he was president, Mohamud failed to deliver a crushing blow to the militants who now control swathes of Somalia and run a lucrative extortion business.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Abdi Sheikh in Mogadishu;
Writing by Elias Biryabarema and Andrew Cawthorne;
Editing by Jonathan Oatis

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Marcos presidency complicates US efforts to counter China

MANILA, Philippines (AP) — Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s apparent landslide victory in the Philippine presidential election is giving rise to immediate concerns about a further erosion of democracy in the region, and could complicate American efforts to blunt growing Chinese influence and power in the Pacific.

Marcos, the son and namesake of longtime dictator Ferdinand Marcos, captured more than 30.8 million votes in Monday’s election according to an unofficial count, more than double those of his closest challenger.

If the results stand, he will take office at the end of June for a six-year term with Sara Duterte, the daughter of outgoing President Rodrigo Duterte, as his vice president.

Duterte — who leaves office with a 67% approval rating — nurtured closer ties with China and Russia, while at times railing against the United States.

He has walked back on many of his threats against Washington, however, including a move to abrogate a defense pact between the two countries, and the luster of China’s promise of infrastructure investment has dulled, with much failing to materialize.

Whether the recent trend in relations with the U.S. will continue has a lot to do with how President Joe Biden’s administration responds to the return of a Marcos to power in the Philippines, said Manila-based political scientist Andrea Chloe Wong, a former researcher in the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs.

“On the one hand you have Biden regarding the geostrategic interests in the Philippines, and on the other hand he has to balance promoting American democratic ideals and human rights,” she said.

“If he chooses to do that, he might have to isolate the Marcos administration, so this will definitely be a delicate balancing act for the Philippines, and Marcos’ approach to the U.S. will highly depend on how Biden will engage with him.”

His election comes at a time when the U.S. has been increasingly focused on the region, embarking on a strategy unveiled in February to considerably broaden U.S. engagement by strengthening a web of security alliances and partnerships, with an emphasis on addressing China’s growing influence and ambitions.

Thousands of American and Filipino forces recently wrapped up one of their largest combat exercises in years, which showcased U.S. firepower in the northern Philippines near its sea border with Taiwan.

Marcos has been short on specifics about foreign policy, but in interviews he said he wanted to pursue closer ties with China, including possibly setting aside a 2016 ruling by a tribunal in The Hague that invalidated almost all of China’s historical claims to the South China Sea.

China has refused to recognize the ruling, and Marcos said it won’t help settle disputes with Beijing, “so that option is not available to us.”

Allowing the U.S. to play a role in trying to settle territorial spats with China will be a “recipe for disaster,” Marcos said in an interview with DZRH radio in January. He said Duterte’s policy of diplomatic engagement with China is “really our only option.”

Marcos has also said he would maintain his nation’s alliance with the U.S., but the relationship is complicated by American backing of the administrations that took power after his father was deposed, and a 2011 U.S. District Court ruling in Hawaii finding him and his mother in contempt of an order to furnish information on assets in connection with a 1995 human rights class action suit against Marcos Sr.

The court fined them $353.6 million, which has never been paid and could complicate the possibility of him visiting the U.S. in the future.

The U.S. has a long history with the Philippines, which was an American colony for most of the first half of the last century before it was granted independence in 1946.

The U.S. closed its last military bases on the Philippines in 1992, but the country’s location on the South China Sea means it remains strategically important, and under a 1951 collective defense treaty the U.S. guarantees its support if the Philippines is attacked.

Even though the Biden administration may have preferred to work with Marcos’ leading opponent, Leni Robredo, the “U.S.-Philippines alliance is vital to both nations’ security and prosperity, especially in the new era of competition with China,” said Gregory B. Poling, director of the Southeast Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

“Unlike Leni, with her coherent platform for good governance and development at home and standing up to China abroad, Marcos is a policy cipher,” Poling said in a research note. “He has avoided presidential debates, shunned interviews, and has been silent on most issues.”

Marcos has been clear, however, that he would like to try again to improve ties with Beijing, Poling said.

“But when it comes to foreign policy, Marcos will not have the same space for maneuver that Duterte did,” he said. “The Philippines tried an outstretched hand and China bit it. That is why the Duterte government has re-embraced the U.S. alliance and gotten tougher on Beijing over the last two years.”

Marcos Sr. was ousted in 1986 after millions of people took to the streets, forcing an end to his corrupt dictatorship and a return to democracy. But the election of Duterte as president in 2016 brought a return to a strongman-type leader, which voters have now doubled-down on with Marcos Jr.

Domestically, Marcos, who goes by his childhood nickname “Bongbong,” is widely expected to pick up where Duterte left off, stifling a free press and cracking down on dissent with less of the outgoing leader’s crude and brash style, while putting an end to ongoing attempts to recover some of the billions of dollars his father pilfered from the state coffers.

But a return to the hard-line rule of his father, who declared martial law for much of his rule, is not likely, said Julio Teehankee, a political science professor at Manila’s De La Salle University.

“He does not have the courage or the brilliance, or even the ruthlessness to become a dictator, so I think what we will see is a form of authoritarian-lite or Marcos-lite,” Teehankee said.

The new Marcos government will not mean the end of Philippine democracy, Poling said, “though it may accelerate its decay.”

“The country’s democratic institutions have already been battered by six years of the Duterte presidency and the rise of online disinformation, alongside the decades-long corrosives of oligarchy, graft, and poor governance,” he said.

“The United States would be better served by engagement rather than criticism of the democratic headwinds buffeting the Philippines.”

Marcos’ approach at home could have a spillover effect in other countries in the region, where democratic freedoms are being increasingly eroded in many places and the Philippines had been seen as a positive influence, Wong said.

“This will have an impact on Philippine foreign policy when it comes to promoting its democratic values, freedoms and human rights, particularly in Southeast Asia,” she said. “The Philippines is regarded as a bastion of democracy in the region, with a strong civil society and a noisy media, and with Bongbong Marcos as president, we will have less credibility.”

___

Rising reported from Bangkok.

Read original article here

Protests break out as Philippines election returns a Marcos to presidency

  • Marcos leads unofficial tally by wide margin over rivals
  • Philippine stocks fall, but peso up following election
  • About 400 anti-Marcos protesters rally outside poll commission
  • Poll body dismisses appeals seeking to disqualify Marcos

MANILA, May 10 (Reuters) – The Philippines woke to a new but familiar political landscape on Tuesday, after an election triumph by Ferdinand Marcos Jr. paved the way for a once unimaginable return to the country’s highest office for its most notorious political dynasty.

Marcos, better known as “Bongbong”, trounced bitter rival Leni Robredo to become the first candidate in recent history to win an outright majority in a Philippines presidential election, marking a stunning comeback by the son and namesake of an ousted dictator that has been decades in the making. read more

Marcos fled into exile in Hawaii with his family during a 1986 “people power” uprising that ended his father’s autocratic 20-year rule, and has served in congress and the senate since his return to the Philippines in 1991.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Marcos’s runaway victory in Monday’s election now looks certain with about98% of the eligible ballots counted in an unofficial tallyshowing he hasnearly 31 million votes, double that of Robredo.

An official result is expected around the end of the month.

“There are thousands of you out there, volunteers, parallel groups, political leaders that have cast their lot with us because of our belief in our message of unity,” Marcos said in a statementstreamed on Facebook, while standing beside the Philippine flag.

Though Marcos, 64, campaigned on a platform of unity, political analysts say his presidency is unlikely to foster that, despite the margin of victory.

Philippine stocks (.PSI) fell 3% on Tuesday before paring losses. The drop tracked weaker global equities, though analysts cited uncertainty over what policies Marcos might follow.

“Investors would like to see his economic team,” said Jonathan Ravelas, chief market strategist at BDO Unibank in Manila. The peso currency , meanwhile, rose 0.4% against the dollar.

Many among the millions of Robredo voters are angered by what they see as a brazen attempt by the disgraced former first family to use its mastery of social media to reinvent historical narratives of its time in power.

Thousands of opponents of the senior Marcos suffered persecution during a brutal 1972-1981 era of martial law, and the family name became synonymous with plunder, cronyism and extravagant living, with billions of dollars of state wealth disappearing.

The Marcos family has denied wrongdoing and many of its supporters, bloggers and social media influencers say historical accounts are distorted.

STUDENTS STAGE PROTEST

Around 400 people, mostly students, staged a protest outside the election commission on Tuesday against Marcos and citing election irregularities.

The Commission on Election (Comelec), which said the poll was relatively peaceful, also upheld on Tuesday its dismissals of complaints filed by different groups, including victims of martial law, that had sought to disbar Marcos from the presidential race based on a 1995 tax evasion conviction.

One of the petitioners, Akbayan, a leftist group, said it will appeal the decision at the Supreme Court, describing it as “both a colossal and institutional failure.”

A big win for Marcos was securing President Rodrigo Duterte’s daughter, Sara Duterte-Carpio, as his vice presidential running mate. She won more than three times the number of votes compared with her nearest rival and also likely broadened the Marcos appeal in many areas.

Human rights group Karapatan called on Filipinos to reject the new Marcos presidency, which it said was built on lies and disinformation “to deodorize the Marcoses’ detestable image”.

Marcos, who shied away from debates and interviews during the campaign, recently praised his father as a genius and a statesman but has also been irked by questions about the martial law era.

As the vote count showed the extent of the Marcos win, Robredo told her supporters to continue their fight for truth until the next election.

“It took time to build the structures of lies. We have time and opportunity to fight and dismantle these,” she said.

Marcos gave few clues on the campaign trail of what his policy agenda would look like, but is widely expected to closely follow outgoing President Duterte, who targeted big infrastructure works, close ties with China and strong growth. Duterte’s tough leadership style won him big support.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Additional reporting by Neil Jerome Morales; Writing by Martin Petty; Editing by Ed Davies and Raju Gopalakrishnan

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Philippines Live Updates: Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Is Bound for Presidency

Credit…Ezra Acayan/Getty Images

MANILA — Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the son and namesake of the former Philippines dictator, appeared sure to win the country’s presidential election on Monday, with a commanding vote margin that heralded a remarkable revival for a family once forced into exile, but that also raised profound questions about the future of Southeast Asia’s oldest democracy.

With 90.1 percent of the election returns counted in a preliminary tally as of 1:47 a.m. Tuesday Manila time, Mr. Marcos had 28.8 million votes, more than double that of his closest rival, Leni Robredo, the current vice president.

Credit…Jes Aznar/Getty Images

That put him on the path for the biggest margin of victory in a presidential race in the Philippines since the 1980s, when Corazon Aquino was elected in the wake of the ouster of Mr. Marcos’s father by the “People Power” uprising by millions of Filipinos denouncing corruption and repression. The elder Mr. Marcos died in exile in 1989.

In 1991, the Marcoses were allowed to return to the Philippines. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. soon began working to rehabilitate the family name and begin a new rise to political influence, winning key leadership roles at the state level before entering national politics as a senator in 2010.

Today, Mr. Marcos, who is 64, is being backed by millions of voters who have grown disillusioned with their country’s brand of democracy and its failure to address the basic needs of its citizens. Poverty is widespread, inequality has widened and corruption remains rampant.

But his opponents fear that as president, Mr. Marcos will only deepen the culture of impunity enshrined by the departing Mr. Duterte, who personally worked to aid a Marcos comeback during his years in power.

Pollsters said the support for Mr. Marcos directly correlated with President Rodrigo Duterte’s base. Mr. Marcos’s supporters saw in him a glimmer of Mr. Duterte, whose strongman rule remains largely popular in the Philippines. Many of them backed Mr. Marcos because Sara Duterte, Mr. Duterte’s daughter, ran for vice president on his ticket. She appeared set to clinch the vice presidency, with 24.4 million votes, more than triple that of Senator Francis Pangilinan, who ran in support of Ms. Robredo.

But by the time polls closed at 7 p.m., accounts of alarming irregularities had been reported across the country: malfunctioning voting machines, insufficient numbers of backup machines, complaints that voters had been left off registration rolls, and that their ballots had been tampered with.

Still, Mr. Marcos’s lead was so strong by the end of Monday night that it appeared nearly inevitable that he would be the winner.

A victory for Mr. Marcos is likely to lead to democracy regressing further in the Philippines, where institutions have been obliterated or weakened under Mr. Duterte. Impunity could prevail — Mr. Marcos, who is known by his boyhood nickname “Bongbong,” has indicated that he would shield Mr. Duterte from an investigation by the International Criminal Court for a violent drug war that has claimed thousands of victims.

Critics fear that Mr. Marcos, who has repeatedly said he would not apologize for his father’s legacy, could also dismantle the agency set up to investigate the government money his family is accused of stealing. His campaign spent years in an effort to recast a period of dictatorship as one of development.

“Personally, I’m devastated,” said Sol Iglesias, an assistant professor of political science at the University of the Philippines Diliman. “This is a dashing of the hopes that there will be a U-turn away from the backsliding toward authoritarian rule that was begun by President Duterte.”

Late on Monday night, spontaneous celebrations erupted outside Mr. Marcos’s campaign headquarters on the EDSA boulevard, where huge crowds of Filipinos had gathered in peaceful protest against his father more than three decades ago. Supporters sang a martial law anthem, waved the Philippines flag and chanted: “Bongbong, Sara!”

Credit…Jes Aznar for The New York Times

In a speech to his supporters on Monday night, with days of official vote counting ahead, Mr. Marcos urged patience.

“It’s not over yet,” he said. “Let us keep watch over our votes. And if I do get lucky, I am hoping for your unending help and trust.”

But the Marcos name remains tarnished among many Filipinos who see the family as a symbol of greed and excess, accused by the government of looting as much as $10 billion from the treasury. The “People Power” revolt was seen as a model for many other countries with fledgling democracy movements.

“It’s extremely disappointing to see where we are at this stage in the game,” said Cleo Anne A. Calimbahin, an associate professor of political science at the De La Salle University-Manila.

Mr. Marcos will face a range of challenges presiding over a divided country. He has campaigned on a platform of unity, promising Filipinos that he would “help them rise again.” But many of his policy proposals remain thin and he has shunned most of the news media and avoided nearly all debates.

On Ms. Robredo’s side, hundreds of thousands of people, many of them young, campaigned door to door for her in an unprecedented grassroots movement and flocked to her rallies, seeing in her a leader who could bring about change.

Credit…Jes Aznar for The New York Times

Ultimately, they struggled against a powerful political family that was adept at building alliances and avoiding any semblance of accountability. Just five years after Mr. Marcos’s family was forced to flee, the government allowed his family to return to the Philippines. They continued building their fiefdom in the northern province of Ilocos Norte, the family’s stronghold. Imelda Marcos, Mr. Marcos’s 92-year-old mother, twice ran unsuccessfully for president in the 1990s.

Mr. Marcos served as vice governor, governor and congressman in Ilocos Norte for most of the period between the 1980s and 2010. That year, he entered the national political scene when he was elected senator. He ran for the vice presidency in 2016 and lost narrowly to Ms. Robredo by just over 260,000 votes.

Mr. Marcos also drew support from the young, who say they enjoy watching his YouTube videos portraying him as a cool parent in game-show segments with his family. A survey has shown that seven out of 10 Filipinos aged 18 to 24 want him to be president. The country’s textbooks gloss over the atrocities of the Marcos era.

“I think he can solve everything,” said Chereen Nicole Rivera, a 21-year-old student who was celebrating Mr. Marcos’s win. “The money stolen was not by him, but by his dad. He should not be judged by the sins of his dad.”

Critics fear that Mr. Marcos, as president, could influence the courts to overturn the criminal convictions against himself and his mother, and the outstanding cases against his family. Mr. Marcos was sentenced to up to three years in prison in 1995 for tax-related convictions, but his sentence was overturned on appeal two years later, even though his conviction remains on the books. In 2018, his mother was sentenced to up to 11 years in prison for creating private foundations to hide her unexplained wealth. She posted bail, and the Supreme Court is still reviewing her appeal.

Separately, the government is still demanding that the Marcoses pay an estate tax of at least $3.9 billion, which Mr. Marcos has dismissed as “fake news.”

Mr. Duterte, an ally of the Marcoses, had paved the way for a full rehabilitation of the Marcos name. In 2016, he allowed for the father’s body to be moved to the Philippines’ equivalent of Arlington National Cemetery, despite protests. And it was not until Sara Duterte made the surprise announcement that she would run for vice president instead of president that Mr. Marcos gained his large lead in the polls.

The alliance of the Marcoses and the Dutertes “has effectively formed a dynasty cartel,” said Aries Arugay, a professor of political science at the University of the Philippines Diliman.

“When you have a collusion of this at this level, then they might be able to cooperate to the extent that it will just be another Duterte, another Marcos for decades and decades to come,” Professor Arugay said.

“The Philippines is heading more and more towards an electoral autocracy, an authoritarian regime that has the semblance of ‘democratic elections’ that will just keep on electing dynasties into power.”

Read original article here

‘Our blood is boiling’: Victims angry as son of dictator closes in on Philippine presidency

MANILA, May 5 (Reuters) – Former political prisoner Cristina Bawagan still has the dress she wore the day she was arrested, tortured and sexually abused by soldiers during the late Philippines’ dictator Ferdinand Marcos’s brutal era of martial law.

Bawagan fears the horrors of Marcos’s rule would be diminished if his namesake son wins the presidency in next week’s election, a victory that would cap a three-decade political fightback for a family driven out in a 1986 “people power” uprising.

Also known as “Bongbong”, Marcos Jr. has benefited from what some political analysts describe as a decades-long public relations effort to alter perceptions of his family, accused of living lavishly at the helm of one of Asia’s most notorious kleptocracies. read more

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Rivals of the family say the presidential run is an attempt to rewrite history, and change a narrative of corruption and authoritarianism associated with his father’s era.

“This election is not just a fight for elected positions. It is also a fight against disinformation, fake news, and historical revisionism,” Leni Robredo, Marcos’s main rival in the presidential race, told supporters in March.

TSEK.PH, a fact-checking initiative for the May 9 vote, told Reuters last month it has debunked scores of martial law-related disinformation it says were used to rehabilitate, erase or burnish the discreditable record of Marcos Snr.

Marcos Jr.’s camp did not reply to written requests for comment from Reuters on Bawagan’s story.

Marcos Jr., who last week called his late father a “political genius”, has previously denied claims of spreading misinformation and his spokesperson has said Marcos does not engage in negative campaigning. read more

Bawagan, 67, said martial law victims like her needed to share their stories to counter the portrayal of the elder Marcos’s regime as a peaceful, golden age for the Southeast Asian country.

“It is very important they see primary evidence that it really happened,” said Bawagan while showing the printed dress which had a tear below the neckline where her torturer passed a blade across her chest and fondled her breasts.

THOUSANDS IMPRISONED, KILLED

The elder Marcos ruled for two decades from 1965, almost half of it under martial law.

During that time, 70,000 people were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured, and 3,240 were killed, according to figures from Amnesty International – figures which Marcos Jr. questioned in a January interview. read more

Bawagan, an activist, was arrested on May 27, 1981 by soldiers in the province of Nueva Ecija for alleged subversion and brought to a “safehouse” where she was beaten as they tried to extract a confession from her.

“I would receive slaps on my face every time they were not satisfied with my answers and that was all the time,” Bawagan said. “They hit strongly at my thighs and clapped my ears. They tore my duster (dress) and fondled my breasts.”

“The hardest thing was when they put an object in my vagina. That was the worst part of it and all throughout I was screaming. No one seemed to hear,” said Bawagan, a mother of two.

‘NO ARRESTS’

In a conversation with Marcos Jr. that appeared on YouTube in 2018, Juan Ponce Enrile, who served as the late dictator’s defence minister, said not one person was arrested for their political and religious views, or for criticising the elder Marcos.

However, more than 11,000 victims of state brutality during martial law later received reparations using millions from Marcos’s Swiss bank deposits, part of billions the family siphoned off from the country’s coffers and recovered by the Philippine government. read more Among them was Felix Dalisay, who was detained for 17 months from August 1973 after he was beaten and tortured by soldiers trying to force him to inform on other activists, causing him to suffer hearing loss.

“They kicked me even before I boarded the military jeep so I fell and hit my face on the ground,” Dalisay said, showing a scar on his right eye as he recounted the day he was arrested.

When they reached the military headquarters, Dalisay said he was brought to an interrogation room, where soldiers repeatedly clapped his ears, kicked and hit him, sometimes with a butt of a rifle, during questioning.

“They started by inserting bullets used in a .45 calibre gun between my fingers and they would squeeze my hand. That really hurt. If they were not satisfied with my answers, they would hit me,” Dalisay pointing to different parts of his body.

The return of a Marcos to the country’s seat of power is unthinkable for Dalisay, who turned 70 this month.

“Our blood is boiling at that thought,” said Dalisay. “Marcos Sr declared martial law then they will say nobody was arrested, and tortured? We are here speaking while we are still alive.”

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Karen Lema; Editing by Lincoln Feast.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Victims angry as son of dictator closes in on Philippine presidency

By Karen Lema

MANILA (Reuters) – Former political prisoner Cristina Bawagan still has the dress she wore the day she was arrested, tortured and sexually abused by soldiers during the late Philippines’ dictator Ferdinand Marcos’s brutal era of martial law.

Bawagan fears the horrors of Marcos’s rule would be diminished if his namesake son wins the presidency in next week’s election, a victory that would cap a three-decade political fightback for a family driven out in a 1986 “people power” uprising.

Also known as “Bongbong”, Marcos Jr. has benefited from what some political analysts describe as a decades-long public relations effort to alter perceptions of his family, accused of living lavishly at the helm of one of Asia’s most notorious kleptocracies.

Rivals of the family say the presidential run is an attempt to rewrite history, and change a narrative of corruption and authoritarianism associated with his father’s era.

“This election is not just a fight for elected positions. It is also a fight against disinformation, fake news, and historical revisionism,” Leni Robredo, Marcos’s main rival in the presidential race, told supporters in March.

TSEK.PH, a fact-checking initiative for the May 9 vote, told Reuters last month it has debunked scores of martial law-related disinformation it says were used to rehabilitate, erase or burnish the discreditable record of Marcos Snr.

Marcos Jr.’s camp did not reply to written requests for comment from Reuters on Bawagan’s story.

Marcos Jr., who last week called his late father a “political genius”, has previously denied claims of spreading misinformation and his spokesperson has said Marcos does not engage in negative campaigning.

Bawagan, 67, said martial law victims like her needed to share their stories to counter the portrayal of the elder Marcos’s regime as a peaceful, golden age for the Southeast Asian country.

“It is very important they see primary evidence that it really happened,” said Bawagan while showing the printed dress which had a tear below the neckline where her torturer passed a blade across her chest and fondled her breasts.

THOUSANDS IMPRISONED, KILLED

The elder Marcos ruled for two decades from 1965, almost half of it under martial law.

During that time, 70,000 people were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured, and 3,240 were killed, according to figures from Amnesty International – figures which Marcos Jr. questioned in a January interview.

Bawagan, an activist, was arrested on May 27, 1981 by soldiers in the province of Nueva Ecija for alleged subversion and brought to a “safehouse” where she was beaten as they tried to extract a confession from her.

“I would receive slaps on my face every time they were not satisfied with my answers and that was all the time,” Bawagan said. “They hit strongly at my thighs and clapped my ears. They tore my duster (dress) and fondled my breasts.”

“The hardest thing was when they put an object in my vagina. That was the worst part of it and all throughout I was screaming. No one seemed to hear,” said Bawagan, a mother of two.

‘NO ARRESTS’

In a conversation with Marcos Jr. that appeared on YouTube in 2018, Juan Ponce Enrile, who served as the late dictator’s defence minister, said not one person was arrested for their political and religious views, or for criticising the elder Marcos.

However, more than 11,000 victims of state brutality during martial law later received reparations using millions from Marcos’s Swiss bank deposits, part of billions the family siphoned off from the country’s coffers and recovered by the Philippine government. Among them was Felix Dalisay, who was detained for 17 months from August 1973 after he was beaten and tortured by soldiers trying to force him to inform on other activists, causing him to suffer hearing loss.

“They kicked me even before I boarded the military jeep so I fell and hit my face on the ground,” Dalisay said, showing a scar on his right eye as he recounted the day he was arrested.

When they reached the military headquarters, Dalisay said he was brought to an interrogation room, where soldiers repeatedly clapped his ears, kicked and hit him, sometimes with a butt of a rifle, during questioning.

“They started by inserting bullets used in a .45 calibre gun between my fingers and they would squeeze my hand. That really hurt. If they were not satisfied with my answers, they would hit me,” Dalisay pointing to different parts of his body.

The return of a Marcos to the country’s seat of power is unthinkable for Dalisay, who turned 70 this month.

“Our blood is boiling at that thought,” said Dalisay. “Marcos Sr declared martial law then they will say nobody was arrested, and tortured? We are here speaking while we are still alive.”

(Reporting by Karen Lema; Editing by Lincoln Feast.)

Read original article here

Biden’s ‘cursed presidency’: gas prices are latest headache as midterms loom | Joe Biden

The left are urging a green energy revolution. The right are sounding a battle cry of “Drill, baby, drill”. And American voters, tired of political excuses, are feeling angry.

Rising gas prices pose a fresh election year headache for Joe Biden. Republicans accuse him of pushing “a radical anti-US energy agenda”. Democrats put the blame on greedy oil companies and the assault on Ukraine by the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin.

While some argue that crisis offers opportunity, consumers are feeling the pinch in the latest knotty problem for a US president who, after 14 months in office, seemingly cannot catch a break.

“Biden has a cursed presidency,” observed Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. “He’s gotten nailed by the continuation of Covid, by inflation being out of control, by a lunatic leader in Russia and now soaring energy prices that are hitting voters in the pocketbook. They want to be able to get gas for their cars and not spend a hundred bucks.

Prices at the pump, which hit a record high of $4.43 a gallon on average last weekend, were rising long before Russia invaded Ukraine as demand recovered from coronavirus lockdowns. But in announcing a ban on US imports of Russian oil, Biden sought to reframe it as “Putin’s price hike”.

Republicans, however, saw a political cudgel with which to beat him. They argue that Biden campaigned on a promise to “wage war” on domestic energy production, signed an executive order to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies and suspended or halted oil and gas leases on federal lands.

A sign displays $4.49 a gallon at an Exxon gas station in Washington DC on 13 March. Photograph: Stefani Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images

Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, tweeted: “Nobody buys Democrats’ efforts to blame 14 months of failed policies on three weeks of crisis in Europe. Inflation and gas prices were skyrocketing and hurting families long before late last month. The White House needs to stop trying to deny their mistakes and start fixing them.”

Republicans have also condemned the White House for reportedly considering deals with autocratic regimes for a back-up oil supply, undermining Biden’s moral authority at a critical moment on the world stage. Former president Donald Trump told supporters at a rally in South Carolina: “Now Biden is crawling around the globe on his knees begging and pleading for mercy from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Venezuela.”

Their solution? Vastly increase domestic oil and gas production to end reliance on foreign countries. Introducing legislation to that end, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri said: “To be strong and free as a nation, we must be energy independent. My bill will reverse Joe Biden’s disastrous energy surrender that has allowed Russian energy dominance and instead open up American production full-throttle.”

But critics say that, while “energy independence” appears a resonant campaign slogan, it is based on false premise. The price of oil is set on the global market, not by domestic producers. The US exported more petroleum than it imported in 2021, according to the Energy Information Administration, while also increasing overall crude oil production.

Nikos Tsafos, an energy and geopolitics expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies thinktank in Washington, said: “We are energy independent by the definition that people use. We are a net exporter of energy and it doesn’t do anything to protect us, which is not a surprise to anyone who has ever thought about energy markets.”

There is a different potential culprit. Consumer gas prices usually move in tandem with oil prices but this week, when oil prices fell below $100 a barrel as China’s Covid-19 outbreak threatened demand, there was little relief for at the pump. Democrats accuse giant oil corporations, already raking in billions of dollars, of profiteering.

Biden wrote in a tweet: “Oil prices are decreasing, gas prices should too. Last time oil was $96 a barrel, gas was $3.62 a gallon. Now it’s $4.31. Oil and gas companies shouldn’t pad their profits at the expense of hardworking Americans.”

Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, and Frank Pallone, chair of the House of Representatives’ energy and commerce committee, requested that oil company chief executives testify before Congress on 6 April. Schumer said on the Senate floor: “The bewildering incongruity between falling oil prices and rising gas prices smacks of price gouging.”

In an interview with the Guardian, Ed Markey, a Democratic senator for Massachusetts, pointed out that oil companies already have all the land they need to heed Republicans’ plea to “drill, baby, drill” – but will not do it because it is contrary to their business model.

“Chevron, Exxon, BP, Shell – they made a combined $75bn in net profits last year and, despite all their crocodile tears right now about this crisis, they’ve already announced that they’re going to return $38bn to their shareholders instead of taking the $38bn and beginning to drill on the 12,000 leases that they have on federal land in the United States for oil and gas,” Markey said.

“The reason they’re not going to do it is that they are hypocrites, they are liars. They don’t want to drill because if we produce more oil, that would lower prices for consumers. So it’s all one big lie.

Markey, who helped devise the Green New Deal platform to wean America off fossil fuels at home or abroad, welcomed Biden’s move to tap into the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which contains 600m barrels. But he added: “In the long term, we need a technology revolution. If we do it, we’re going to be looking at all these companies and countries in a rear-view mirror historically.

“We need to go to ‘plug in, baby, plug in’. We need wind, solar, battery storage technologies, all-electric vehicles, all the other innovation technologies that reduce greenhouse gases, but also back out the need for oil and gas in our economy, the European economy, the economy of Japan and all of our allies.”

Does Biden, juggling so many crises, still get that?

Markey replied: “I was part of a meeting with the president last Wednesday night and he once again made a commitment to his effort to achieve that energy technology revolution in our country.”

There is also grassroots pressure on Biden. More than 200 environmental and indigenous organizations signed a letter demanding that he use the Defense Production Act, normally deployed by presidents in wartime to force companies to make weapons, to compel businesses to produce solar panels, wind turbines and other clean energy sources.

John Paul Mejia, national spokesperson for the Sunrise Movement, a youth movement to stop climate change, said: “The playbook of fossil fuel executives is clearer now than ever. They have used the crisis of war to surge prices at the expense of working people and the takeaway from this is that it is incredibly dangerous and anti-democratic to have an economy dependent on fossil fuels.

“We need Biden to use the Defence Production Act to take decisive measures on the urgency, scope and scale of this crisis and transition to clean, renewable, reliable energy.”

Biden has given little hint of such a move as he relies on Congress to take action. But his signature Build Back Better plan, which would have poured about $550bn into the clean energy and climate business, appears to be going nowhere fast.

One of the chief obstacles is the Democratic senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who recently told an energy conference that he was “very reluctant” to see the development of electric vehicles. A key vote in the evenly divided chamber, Manchin has taken more money in political donations from fossil fuel interests than any other senator.

Joe Manchin at a news conference about a bill to ban Russian energy imports on 3 March. Photograph: Jacquelyn Martin/AP

Mejia added: “One of the things to view that’s specific to the United States right now is that the crook executives in the fossil fuel industry have a strong hold over American politics in the sense that they have incredibly powerful politicians bought out like Joe Manchin.

“At this moment what we’re seeing, especially ahead of elections too, are the so-called conservative Democrats suddenly overnight flipping and pretending to be working-class champions as they morph themselves into caring about what working people are feeling at the gas pump right now. But they’re really just fulfilling their allegiances to their big oil donors.

Opinion polls suggest Biden’s handling of the war in Ukraine has broad public approval but, with hints of a fresh coronavirus wave, his list of problems never seems to shorten. Whatever the causes of inflation, history suggests that voters may punish him at the ballot box.

The president’s legislative ambitions for the climate crisis and other priorities are about to collide with midterm elections in which all signs point to Republicans winning the House and possibly the Senate. Biden could find himself spending the second half of his presidency vetoing laws rather than signing them.

Jamal Raad, co-founder and executive director of the campaign group Evergreen Action, said: “If there was ever a moment of need for moving to a 100% clean energy economy was more clear that now, I don’t know when would be with a fossil fueled enabled leader attacking another country and throwing the whole fossil fuel global market into chaos. I do believe this is a make-or-break moment.”



Read original article here

Netflix US revives TV comedy that launched Zelenskiy to Ukraine presidency | Ukraine

The comedy satire in which Volodymyr Zelenskiy unexpectedly becomes Ukraine’s president will be aired again on Netflix in the US.

The resurrection of the TV series Servant of the People comes amid a global outpouring of praise for the former comedian who is now leading his country’s fight against the Russian invasion. “You asked and it’s back,” Netflix announced.

On Tuesday, Zelenskiy received a standing ovation as he addressed the US Congress via video link with an impassioned plea for more weaponry and the establishment of a no-fly zone to help Ukraine survive the Russian invasion, which began on 24 February.

Before politics, Zelenskiy wrote and produced standup comedy shows, TV series and films, and sold tickets to live concerts.

Servant of the People sees Zelenskiy, who is now 44, play a teacher who unexpectedly becomes president after a video of him complaining about corruption goes viral.

Once elected, Zelenskiy’s character faces a difficult task to reform Ukraine, fight corruption and unify the nation despite resistance from politicians serving the interests of oligarchs. The show resonated with Ukrainians and audiences in other former Soviet countries

The first two seasons released in 2015 and 2017 were a hit. The series was also an integral part of Zelenskiy’s own triumphant presidential campaign in 2019.

The third season was released under the tagline The Choice in March 2019, just a few days before the first round of elections, and promotion of the show was planned to coincide with Zelenskiy’s real-life campaign. Clips from earlier seasons of the satire circulated on the campaign’s social media accounts, blurring the lines between Zelenskiy’s life and that of his on-screen character.

He was elected to the presidency in a landslide in 2019, securing more than 70% of the vote. Later that year, Zelenskiy’s personal fame and appeal helped his new party, named after the TV series, win parliamentary elections.

After Zelenskiy won the presidency, some of his friends and business partners from his film production business, Kvartal 95, joined his administration.

The French-German TV channel Arte has been showing Servant of the People online since 19 November, citing huge interest. Since the first days of the invasion, channels that have acquired the rights to air the series include Channel 4 in Britain, ANT 1 in Greece and PRO TV in Romania.

The series was first on Netflix from 2017 to 2021.

Agence France-Presse contributed to this report

Read original article here

Yoon Suk-yeol Wins South Korean Presidency

SEOUL — A graft prosecutor-turned opposition leader has won an extremely close presidential election in South Korea, reinstating conservatives to power with calls for a more confrontational stance against North Korea and a stronger alliance with the United States.

With 98 percent of the votes counted, the opposition leader, Yoon Suk-yeol, was leading by a margin of 263,000 votes, or 0.8 percentage points, when his opponent conceded early Thursday. It was South Korea’s tightest race since it began holding free presidential elections in 1987.

Mr. Yoon will replace President Moon Jae-in, a progressive leader whose single five-year term ends in May.

The election was widely seen as a referendum on ​Mr. Moon’s government. Its failure to curb skyrocketing housing prices angered voters. ​ So did #MeToo and corruption scandals involving ​Mr. Moon’s political allies, as well as a lack of progress in rolling back North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.

This was not an election for the future but an election looking back ​to judge the Moon administration,” said Prof. Ahn Byong-jin, a political scientist at Kyung Hee University in Seoul. “By electing Yoon, people wanted to punish Moon’s government they deemed incompetent and hypocritical and to demand a fairer society.”

But, as the close results showed, the electorate was closely divided, with many voters lamenting a choice between “unlikables.”

Mr. Yoon’s opponent, Lee Jae-myung of the governing Democratic Party, acknowledged his country’s rifts in his concession speech. “I sincerely ask the president-elect to lead the country over the divide and conflict and open an era of unity and harmony,” he said.

The victory for Mr. Yoon, who is 61, returns conservatives back to power after five years in the political wilderness. His People Power Party had been in disarray following the impeachment of its leader, President Park Geun-hye​, whom Mr. Yoon helped convict and imprison on corruption charges​. Mr. Yoon, who also went after another former president and the head of Samsung, was recruited by the party to engineer a conservative revival.

The election was watched closely by both South Korea’s neighbors and the United States government. Mr. Yoon’s election might upend the current president’s progressive agenda, especially ​his policy of seeking dialogue and peace with North Korea. As president, Mr. Moon has met with North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, three times, though that did nothing to stop Mr. Kim from rapidly expanding ​his nuclear weapons program.

Mr. Yoon has vehemently criticized Mr. Moon’s ​approach on North Korea, as well as toward China.

He insists that U.N. sanctions should be enforced until North Korea is completely denuclearized, a stance that aligns more closely with Washington’s than with Mr. Moon’s, and is anathema to North Korea. Mr. Yoon has also called for ratcheting up joint military drills between South Korea and the United States — which were scaled down under Mr. Moon — another stance likely to rile North Korea, which may now raise tensions through more weapons tests.

“Peace is meaningless unless it is backed by power,” Mr. Yoon said during the campaign. “War can be avoided only when we acquire an ability to launch pre-emptive strikes and show our willingness to use them.”

Mr. Moon has ​kept a balance between the United States, South Korea’s most important ally, and China, its biggest trading partner​ — an approach known as “strategic ambiguity.​” Mr. Yoon said he would show “strategic clarity,” and favor Washington. He called the ​rivalry between the two great powers “a contest between liberalism and authoritarianism.”

North Korea will likely pose Mr. Yoon’s first foreign policy crisis.

It has conducted a flurry of missile tests this year and might consider Mr. Yoon’s confrontational rhetoric the prod it needs to escalate tensions further.​

“​W​e will see North Korea return to a power-for-power standoff, at least in the early part of ​Yoon’s term​,” said Lee Byong-chul, a North Korea expert at Kyungnam University’s Institute for Far Eastern Studies in Seoul.

Mr. Yoon served as prosecutor general under Mr. Moon. His political stock rose among conservative South Koreans when he resigned last year and became ​a bitter critic of his former boss. Pre-election surveys had indicated that South Koreans would vote for Mr. Yoon​ less because they liked him than to​ show their anger at Mr. Moon and his Democratic Party.

“This was such a hot and heated race,’’ Mr. Yoon told a gathering of supporters at the National Assembly Library. “But the competition is over and now it’s time for us to join our forces together for the people and the nation.”

The deepening uncertainty, made worse by two years of Covid restrictions, has left many, especially young​ people, ​ anxious about the future.

“We are the betrayed generation,” said Kim Go-eun, 31, ​who works for a convenience store​ chain. “We have been ​taught that if we studi​ed​ and work​ed​ hard, we ​would have a decent job and economically stable life. None of that ​has come true.

“No matter how hard we try, we don’t see a chance to join the middle class​,” she said.

The campaign also exposed a nation deeply divided over gender conflicts. ​Mr. Yoon was accused of pandering to widespread sentiment against China and against feminists among young men, whose support proved crucial to his victory. Exit polls showed the voters in their 20s split sharply along the gender line, with men favoring Mr. Yoon and women Mr. Lee.

Young men said they were gravitating toward ​Mr. Yoon because ​he spoke to some of their deepest concerns, like​ the fear that an influx of immigrants and a ​growing feminist movement would further erode their job opportunities.​ Professor Ahn likened the phenomenon to “Trumpism.”

“We ​may not be completely satisfied with Yoon, but he is the only hope we’ve got,” said Kim Seong-heon, 26, a university student in Seoul who lives in a windowless room barely big enough to squeeze in a bed and closet.

Mr. Yoon promised deregulation to spur investment. He also promised 2.5 million new homes to make housing more affordable.

But the newly elected president may face fierce resistance at the National Assembly, where Mr. Moon’s Democratic Party holds a majority. Mr. Yoon’s campaign promise to abolish the country’s ministry of gender equality may prove particularly contentious.

He also has to contend with a bitter, disillusioned public.

​New allegations of legal and ethical misconduct emerged almost daily to cast doubt on Mr. Yoon and his wife, Kim Keon-hee​, as well as on his rival, Mr. Lee.

Many voters felt they were left with an unappealing choice.

“It was not about who​m​ you like​d​ better but about whom you hate​d​ less,” said Jeong Sang-min, 35, a logistics official at an international apparel company.

Read original article here