Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts

8/24/2012

Barack Obama asks eurozone to keep Greece in until after election day

US officials are worried that if Greece exits the eurozone, it will damage President's election hopes


Πηγή: The Independent
By OLIVER WRIGHT
August 24 2012

The Obama administration will pressure European governments not to let Greece fall out of the eurozone before November's Presidential elections, British Government sources have suggested.

Representatives from the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank and the European Commission are due to arrive in Athens next month to assess Greece's reform efforts.

They are expected to report in time for an 8 October meeting of eurozone finance ministers which will decide on whether to disburse Greece's next €31bn aid tranche, promised under the terms of the bailout for the country.

American officials are understood to be worried that if they decide Greece has not done enough to meet its deficit targets and withhold the money, it would automatically trigger Greece's exit from the eurozone weeks before the Presidential election on 6 November.

They are urging eurozone Governments to hold off from taking any drastic action before then – fearing that the resulting market destabilisation could damage President Obama's re-election prospects. European leaders are thought to be sympathetic to the lobbying fearing that, under pressure from his party lin Congress, Mitt Romney would be a more isolationist president than Mr Obama.

The President discussed the eurozone crisis with David Cameron during a conference call on Wednesday and both welcomed statements by the European Central Bank that it was "standing firmly behind the euro".

The ECB is expected to present a plan in the next few weeks to help indebted countries like Spain and Italy by buying their government bonds.

Today, Prime Minister Antonis Samaras will travel to Berlin to meet Chancellor Angela Merkel, and to France tomorrow for talks with President François Hollande. He is asking that Greece be given more time to meet its deficit targets and implement its reforms as its economy is struggling through a fifth year of recession.

But Germany's Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, said it was only months since creditors drew up a second bailout package and agreed on a massive debt write-down for Greece.

Britain is understood to have pressed the Germans to ensure that if eurozone leaders decide Greece's position is unsustainable the financial "firewall" around Spain and Italy is made stronger. Officials are worried that if Greece was to exit the eurozone, the move could result in dramatic increases in the cost of debt for other weaker eurozone members – making their financial situation unsustainable.



7/25/2012

The U.S. Economic Policy Debate Is a Sham


Πηγή: Bloomberg
By Betsey Stevenson & Justin Wolfers
July 24 2012

Watching Democrats and Republicans hash out their differences in the public arena, it’s easy to get the impression that there’s a deep disagreement among reasonable people about how to manage the U.S. economy.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

About Betsey Stevenson & Justin Wolfers

Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers are, respectively, an assistant professor and an associate professor in the Business and Public Policy Department at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. More about Betsey Stevenson & Justin Wolfers

In reality, there’s remarkable consensus among mainstream economists, including those from the left and right, on most major macroeconomic issues. The debate in Washington about economic policy is phony. It’s manufactured. And it’s entirely political.

Let’s start with Obama’s stimulus. The standard Republican talking point is that it failed, meaning it didn’t reduce unemployment. Yet in a survey of leading economists conducted by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, 92 percent agreed that the stimulus succeeded in reducing the jobless rate. On the harder question of whether the benefit exceeded the cost, more than half thought it did, one in three was uncertain, and fewer than one in six disagreed.

Or consider the widely despised bank bailouts. Populist politicians on both sides have taken to pounding the table against them (in many cases, only after voting for them). But while the public may not like them, there’s a striking consensus that they helped: The same survey found no economists willing to dispute the idea that the bailouts lowered unemployment.
No Support

Do you remember the Republican concern that Obama had somehow caused gas prices to rise, a development that Newt Gingrich promised to reverse? There’s simply no support among economists for this view. They unanimously agreed that “market factors,” rather than energy policy, have driven changes in gas prices.

How about the oft-cited Republican claim that tax cuts will boost the economy so much that they will pay for themselves? It’s an idea born as a sketch on a restaurant napkin by conservative economist Art Laffer. Perhaps when the top tax rate was 91 percent, the idea was plausible. Today, it’s a fantasy. The Booth poll couldn’t find a single economist who believed that cutting taxes today will lead to higher government revenue -- even if we lower only the top tax rate.

The consensus isn’t the result of a faux poll of left-wing ideologues. Rather, the findings come from the Economic Experts Panel run by Booth’s Initiative on Global Markets. It’s a recurring survey of about 40 economists from around the U.S. It includes Democrats, Republicans and independent academics from the top economics departments in the country. The only things that unite them are their first-rate credentials and their interest in public policy.

Let’s be clear about what the economists’ remarkable consensus means. They aren’t purporting to know all the right answers. Rather, they agree on the best reading of murky evidence. The folks running the survey understand this uncertainty, and have asked the economists to rate their confidence in their answers on a scale of 1 to 10. Strikingly, the consensus looks even stronger when the responses are weighted according to confidence.

The debate in Washington has become completely unmoored from this consensus, and in a particular direction: Angry Republicans have pushed their representatives to adopt positions that are at odds with the best of modern economic thinking. That may be good politics, but it’s terrible policy.

The disjunction between the state of economic knowledge and our current political debate has important consequences. Right now, millions of people are suffering due to high unemployment. Our textbooks are filled with possible solutions. Instead of debating them seriously, congressional Republicans are blocking even those policy proposals that strike most economists as uncontroversial.
Raw Politics

This inaction has no basis in economics. Instead, it’s raw politics -- a cynical attempt to score points in a phony rhetorical war or a way of preventing their opponents from scoring a policy win.

The debate about the long-run challenge posed by the federal budget deficit has also become divorced from economic reality. The same panel of economists was almost unanimous in agreeing that “long run fiscal sustainability in the U.S. will require cuts in currently promised Medicare and Medicaid benefits and/or tax increases that include higher taxes on households with incomes below $250,000.” Only one in 10 was uncertain. None objected.

Likewise, popular tax deductions such as that for mortgage interest didn’t fare well in the surveys and would be on almost any economist’s list of targets for reform. Yet neither party is willing to propose such policies.

The consensus, of course, can be wrong. On the probable consequences of economic reforms, though, leading economists are more likely to be right than politicians running for re- election. Their solidarity needs to be taken seriously. Too much of what passes for economic debate in Washington is the product of faith, not evidence.

It’s time to put economics back into the economic debate.

Betsey Stevenson is associate professor of public policy at the University of Michigan. Justin Wolfers is associate professor of business and public policy at the University of Pennsylvania, and a non-resident senior fellow of the Brookings Institution. Both are Bloomberg View columnists. The opinions expressed are their own.



Libya: Avoiding The Holocaust


Πηγή: Strategy Page
July 27 2012

The July 7th elections put non-Islamic conservatives into power. But the majority party, the National Forces Alliance (NFA) contains many leaders who were active in the NTC (National Transitional Council) that exercised shaky control over the country since the Kaddafi government lost power a year ago. There are still dozens of major tribes and warlords with armed militias and unwillingness to obey all orders from the NTC or, apparently the newly elected NFA government. The major challenge is to restore rule of law, and government without triggering armed resistance from the independent minded militias.

The NFA and its allies captured nearly half the seats in parliament and will be able to form a coalition government with some smaller reform-minded groups, or maybe not. Inexperience in running a democracy is causing lots of unexpected problems. One of the more ominous ones is accusations by some Islamic conservative parties that they were cheated in the election and righteous violence might be the right response to such mistreatment. That would be a mistake, and most Islamic conservatives know it.

The majority of Libyans are not shy letting anyone know that they do not want Islamic radicals or, as they call them, "Taliban" running the country. Al Qaeda's murderous policies in Iraq, and elsewhere, have turned most Moslems against Islamic terrorism. That sort of thing obviously kills more Moslems than kaffirs (non-Moslems) and is thus unacceptable. But local opposition does not always stop the Islamic terror groups from trying to impose their will anyway, after all, they are on a Mission From God.

Speaking of law, most Libyans indicated they want law based on Sharia (Islamic law) but now Sharia itself. Women want equal (or at least more equal) rights and everyone wants a modern (rather than medieval) version of Sharia.

The newly elected government is encountering resistance from over a hundred armed militias who refuse to hand over 5,000 prisoners. Most of those held are considered Kaddafi loyalists or "war criminals" (for killing civilians during last year's revolution.) The government has been able to prevent mass executions of these militia prisoners, but there is no judicial system to try them, or functioning prisons to hold those convicted. The government has taken control over two dozen jails throughout the country, but has not been able to put all of them back into operation. The NTC itself holds about 4,000 prisoners.

There are still towns and villages in the interior that are dominated by pro-Kaddafi militias. The government has been too busy trying to keep the peace on the coast (where most Libyans, and independent minded militias, live). But eventually, the thousands of armed Kaddafi diehards will have to be dealt with.

July 16, 2012: In the southwestern town of Ghadames (on the Algerian border) tribal raiders attacked and killed seven people and wounded over twenty. The raiders were from one of several black African tribes that fled the cities after Kaddafi was defeated. Black Libyans were seen as Kaddafi loyalists (although most were not) and generally persecuted by the rebel militias.

July 15, 2012: Attempts to crack down on corruption have caused more problems. For example, over 200 Libyans staged a violent demonstration outside the Libyan embassy in Jordan. The demonstrators want the Libyan government to provide them with lots of money for medical, travel and living expenses. The Libyan government had halted these payments because most of the expense claims were false. All this was because a program last year, to provide medical treatment abroad for wounded rebels.

The program was soon corrupted (not unusual in Libya). Local militia and tribal authorities were allowed to decide who was eligible to go abroad for treatment, and the NTC provided cash for that purpose. But soon anyone with the right connections, or a large enough bribe, got a trip to a European or Moslem country for "medical treatment." Many of those going abroad on this program were not ill, but they got to take family members as well and expected the NTC to pay them a stipend (several hundred dollars a month) while they were abroad. But many of these travelers were actually migrating, and the NTC cut off the stipends and cracked down on who was going. The NTC had to do this, because the "medical treatment abroad" program was draining huge amounts of cash from what little the NTC had, and making most Libyans (who were not in on the boondoggle) angry.

July 13, 2012: In Jordan, 150 Libyans who had just completed police training, rioted when told that the Libyan airline that was to fly them home had delayed their flight. The riots led to buildings being burned down and the use of Jordanian riot police to end the violence.




7/18/2012

Libya: Liberals Beat Islamists in Polls, but no Majority

Libyan children wave the Kingdom of Libya flags from a car during the National Assembly election in Benghazi.

Πηγή: IBT
By VASUDEVAN SRIDHARAN
July 18 2012

An alliance of liberal parties has emerged ahead of its Islamist rivals in elections to Libya's General National Congress - but both factions are a long way from an overall majority.

Final results show that the National Forces Alliance (NFA), led by US-trained economist Mahmoud Jibril, claimed 39 of the 80 seats allocated to political parties in the 7 July elections - Libya's first democratic ballot in over 40 years.

The Justice and Construction Party (JCP), which represents the Muslim Brotherhood, claimed 17 parliamentary seats, with the remaining party seats going to smaller groups. Alongside the 80 places reserved for political groups, 120 have been allocated to individual candidates.

Reports suggest that both the NFA and JCP have begun to court the smaller parties, and independents, in a bid to form a government capable of securing the two-thirds majorities needed to pass major laws and decisions in Congress.

In addition to providing a government, Congress will be responsible for framing a new constitution for Libya, and guide the country towards sustainable democracy.

The country's key democratic institutions were systematically dismantled by Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who was executed in October 2011 following a 42-year dictatorship.

Islamist setback

The results appear to represent a setback for the JCP, which was forecast to perform strongly in the elections following the recent victories for Islamist parties in Egypt and Tunisia.

However the party's leader, Mohamed Sawan, greeted the results with magnanimity, saying: "We feel this is a victory for all Libyans...and we congratulate all the winners, independents and political entities."

Sawan continued: "We think we can get between 60 and 70 seats. We are ready to cooperate with any party that is ready to serve the country."

Around 62 percent of Libya's electorate voted in the polls, and it is reported that polling day was largely peaceful, with only minor outbreaks of violence.



7/11/2012

INTERVIEW-Libya Islamist chief won't concede election defeat


Πηγή: Reuters
By Hadeel Al Shalchi
July 11 2012

The head of Libya's largest Islamist party refused on Wednesday to concede defeat in its first free election in almost half a century, accusing his main liberal rival of "tricking" voters with disingenuous commitments to Islam.

In an interview with Reuters, Mohammed Sawan, leader of the Muslim Brotherhood's political arm, branded wartime prime minister Mahmoud Jibril as a former ally of ousted dictator Muammar Gaddafi and said that Jibril's party could lose its lead once fuller results from Saturday's vote trickle in.

While the Brotherhood ran a slick campaign for Saturday's vote, like other Libyan parties it is new to democracy.

On a desk in an office in the party's headquarters sat a stack of English-language how-to books. The titles: Winning Elections, Campaigning Bootcamp 2.0 and the Campaign Manager. All looked new and barely opened.

"Jibril did not present himself to the Libyan people as a liberal. He presented himself as having an Islamic reference," Sawan said. "Secular currents benefited from the Arab Spring revolutions and raised the banner of Islamic reference... Libyans voted for Jibril as he was considered an Islamist too."

Jibril's National Forces Alliance (NFA) has extended an early lead in the landmark elections, according to incomplete tallies, benefiting from his prominence as one of the main figures in last year's uprising to end Gaddafi's 42-year rule.

But the Western-educated Jibril's early gains do not automatically translate into a majority in the 200-seat assembly as candidates on party lists are only allocated 80 spots.

Sawan said the Brotherhood's Justice and Construction Party (JCP) expected to come into its own once results for independent seats, which rely on connections and social standing, came in.

The main parties, including the JCP, have loyalists running on independent tickets but who will ultimately vote in a bloc with them once in the national assembly.

"Maybe the final result will show that Justice and Construction is the leading party," he said.

But despite such optimism, Sawan wore a look of disappointment. His party had widely been expected to perform strongly, boosted by the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood and moderate Islamist Ennahda in the first post-revolutionary elections in neighbouring Egypt and Tunisia respectively.

The Brotherhood's campaign team was comprised of Libyans who were educated abroad and its huge banners bore the recognisable symbol of a golden stallion. Brotherhood candidates also drafted in their daughters to help with public relations.

Educated in Canada and the United States, they arranged interviews for media in perfect North American-accented English.

Sawan resigned as the head of the Brotherhood and was elected to head the nominally independent JCP ahead of the vote.

NO GRAND COALITION

Despite those efforts, the Brotherhood has struggled to convince Libyans wary of foreign interference that it has no financial or administrative links to its namesake in Egypt.

Another obstacle the Brotherhood has faced is that its leader and its candidates are not well known among Libyans.

Having been thoroughly crushed by Gaddafi, they did not benefit from the vast charitable networks that served their Egyptian counterparts so well at the ballot box.

At the same time, hundreds of mainly Islamist political prisoners, including Sawan himself, were freed from jail in the early 2000s as part of reforms led by Gaddafi's son, Saif al-Islam. The notion that the Brotherhood was willing to cut deals with the old regime to get out of jail damaged their image.

"Libyans don't know the reality of the Islamists and Muslim Brotherhood or the JCP because there is a phobia surrounding them. But the evidence that the Islamists have succeeded will show in the independent votes and everyone will discover that the 120 that won (as) independents are Islamists," he said.

Positioning himself as a potential unifying figure, Jibril earlier this week called on parties to join a grand alliance.

But Sawan showed little appetite for that. Bitterly branding Jibril, who served as a minister under Gaddafi, as the choice of old Gaddafi loyalists, Sawan said his party would clash with Jibril's on the role of religion in politics.

"To them Islamic reference means to establish Islamic rituals, that some personal status laws are sharia-based, but the other areas have nothing to do with Islam... Our view is that Islam is a complete way of life," he said.



7/07/2012

Voting Begins In Libya Amid Fresh Violence



Πηγή: lbc
July 7 2012

Libyans have started voting in the country's first parliamentary elections since the toppling of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi amid fresh violence in Libya.

Anti-election protesters in the eastern city of Benghazi set fire to hundreds of ballot slips after looting a polling station in the first sign of trouble in the landmark poll.

Saturday's elections, which will see a 200-member transitional parliament formed, caps a tumultuous transition from last year’s civil war.

"Words cannot capture my joy, this is a historic day," said Fawziya Omran, one of the first women in line at the Ali Abdullah Warith school in the heart of the capital Tripoli.

"I've made my choice. I hope it is the right choice and that the candidate will not disappoint us," added the 40-year-old.

Hueida Abdul Sheikh, a 47-year-old mother of three in line at a polling station in Banghazi, said: "I feel like my life has been wasted so far, but now my children will have a better life."

Alexander Graf Lambsdorff, who is heading a team of 21 European Union observers, said the poll marked a major milestone in the transition to democracy after 42-years of dictatorship.

"We believe that to have this election in Libya less than one year after the fall of Tripoli is an important achievement," he said.

"We only hope that the situation remains peaceful across the country," he added.

However, the vote is being held amid intense regional rivalries and calls for a boycott.

Tensions have been brewing with many in Libya's oil-rich east expressing their anger at the NTC-issued election laws.

Although they are said to be based on population, the rules allocate their region less than a third of the parliamentary seats, with the rest going to the western region that includes Tripoli and the sparsely-settled desert south.

Speaking from Benghazi, Sky News special correspondent Alex Crawford said: "There certainly has been a lot of trouble in and around Benghazi and there is a certain amount of tension.

"There is security - they don't want people to be too scared to vote.

"However, the overwhelming feeling in the city, and throughout Libya, is that they desperately want this vote to go ahead. The feeling is one of enthusiasm."

An electoral worker was killed on Friday as campaigning came to an end when gunmen fired at a helicopter carrying voting material for the polls.

The helicopter was forced to make an emergency landing outside the eastern town of Benghazi. It was not immediately clear who was responsible.

Col Gaddafi's death brought a close to the uprising, but the end of his four-decade rule left the country deeply divided along regional, tribal and ideological lines.

The parliament will elect a new transitional government to replace one appointed by the National Transitional Council (NTC), the organisation that led the rebel side during the eight-month war and held power in its aftermath.

In what it called an attempt to defuse the row, the NTC decreed on Thursday that the new parliament will not be responsible for naming the panel that will draft a new constitution.

Instead, the drafters will be directly elected by the public in a separate vote at a later date.

But this has not satisfied some in the east, who are pressing for a boycott.

"We don't want Tripoli to rule all of Libya," said Fadlallah Haroun, a former rebel commander in the east's regional capital, Benghazi.

Friday's helicopter attack was one of a series of violent incidents in the run-up to the vote - the official results of which will not be announced until later this month.

On Thursday, ex-militiamen shut down three eastern oil refineries - in Ras Lanouf, Brega and Sidr - to press the transitional government to cancel the vote, Mr Haroun said.

He said militiamen also have cut the country's main coastal highway linking east to west.

Earlier this week, ex-rebel fighters and others in Benghazi and in the nearby town of Ajdabiya attacked elections offices, setting fire to ballot papers.

The elections are expected to test the strength of Islamist parties, which have gained influence in Libya and other nations after dictatorial regimes have been toppled.

Some 2.8 million voters, out of more than three million eligible, have registered for the polls. New parliamentary elections are to be held in 2013, after the constitution is drafted and approved in a referendum.

Observers expect that no party is likely to win an outright majority and the final government may be based on post-election alliances.



5/07/2012

Libya: Revoke Draconian New Law - Legislation Criminalizes Free Speech


Πηγή: allAfrica
May 5 2012

Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC) should immediately revoke a new law that bans insults against the people of Libya or its institutions, Human Rights Watch said today. The law also prohibits criticism of the country's 2011 revolution and glorification of the deposed former leader Muammar Gaddafi.

The law violates Libya's provisional constitutional covenant and international human rights law, both of which guarantee free speech, Human Rights Watch said.

"This legislation punishes Libyans for what they say, reminiscent of the dictatorship that was just overthrown," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "It will restrict free speech, stifle dissent, and undermine the principles on which the Libyan revolution was based."

Under Law 37, passed on May 2, 2012, spreading "false or vicious news" or "propaganda" that harms "military efforts to defend the country, terrorizes people, or weakens the morale of citizens" is a criminal offense, punishable with imprisonment for an unspecified amount of time. Included in "propaganda" is glorification of Gaddafi, his regime, and his sons. If the offensive statements damage the country, the law says, the offender can be sentenced to life in prison.

Anyone who does anything to "damage the February 17 Revolution" can be charged with a crime under the law and sent to prison. February 17 refers to the start of the popular uprising that overthrew Gaddafi in 2011.

Charges can also be brought against anyone who "insults Islam, or the prestige of the state or its institutions or judiciary, and every person who publicly insults the Libyan people, slogan or flag."

The ban on damaging the February 17 Revolution is apparently based on article 195 of Libya's current penal code, drafted and implemented under Gaddafi's rule, which bans any "damage to the great al-Fateh Revolution or its leader." The al-Fateh Revolution brought Gaddafi to power in 1969.

Under the previous government, criticizing Gaddafi or the al-Fateh Revolution was punishable by death. Individuals were regularly imprisoned for criticizing the government, some of them under article 195 of the Libyan penal code.

"It seems the NTC has done a 'cut and paste' job with the Gaddafi-era laws," Whitson said.

A group of Libyan human rights lawyers told Human Rights Watch that they will challenge Law 37 before the country's supreme court.

Libya's constitutional covenant, passed on August 3, 2011, includes a chapter on human rights and freedoms. Article 14 ensures freedom of opinion and speech, as well as assembly.

Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR), governments may only restrict the right to freedom of expression to protect public morals if the restriction conforms to strict tests of necessity and proportionality and is non-discriminatory, including on the grounds of religion or belief. The newly enacted law fails to meet that test, Human Rights Watch said. Libya is a party to both the ICCPR and the African Charter.

The United Nations Human Rights Committee, in its 2011 General Comment on the ICCPR's article 19, held that the right to freedom of expression protects speech that might be deemed offensive or hurtful to followers of a particular religion, unless the speech in question amounts to "advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence." It also said that "States Parties [to the ICCPR] should not prohibit criticism of institutions." The Human Rights Committee is considered the authoritative interpreter of the ICCPR.

Human Rights Watch called on governments supporting Libya's transition, as well as the UN mission in Libya, to condemn the newest law strongly, and other unlawful attempts to restrict free speech, expression, and assembly.

"This law is a slap in the face for all those who were imprisoned under Gaddafi's laws criminalizing political speech, and who fought for a new Libya where human rights are respected," Whitson said. "Libya's new leaders should know that laws restricting what people can say can lead to a new tyranny."





4/12/2012

Egyptian court ruling keeps Salafist candidate in race for president


Πηγή: FP
By Mary Casey
April 12 2012

An Egyptian court ruled on Wednesday that it would not disqualify the ultraconservative Islamist Hazem Abu Ismail from running in presidential elections at this time. 

Concerns that the popular Salafist sheikh, one of the race's frontrunners, would be barred from the contest rose upon evidence that Abu Ismail's mother had become a U.S. citizen and applied to vote in Los Angeles toward the end of her life. 

According to Egyptian electoral law, applicants cannot stand for presidential elections if at least one parent or spouse holds foreign nationality. 

Abu Ismail filed a lawsuit calling for the interior ministry to prove his mother's U.S. citizenship, which it was unable to do. 

Thousands of Egyptians rallying outside the courtroom celebrated the verdict. However, the decision is not final and a list of eligible candidates will be released by the national election commission on April 26 ahead of the first round of voting on May 23 and 24.

If Abu Ismail is still banned from candidacy, it will likely boost support for his more moderate Islamist competitors Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh and Khairat el-Shater, who also faces possible disqualification over a controversial pardon of a conviction under former President Hosni Mubarak.




4/08/2012

Mubarak loyalist to run for president

The presidential election scheduled for May will mark the beginning of a handover of power by the ruling military to an elected civilian leader, following last year’s popular uprising that overthrew longtime strongman Hosni Mubarak.

Πηγή: Washington Post
By Ernesto Londoño
April 6 2012

CAIRO — Egypt’s powerful spy chief under deposed President Hosni Mubarak roiled the country’s presidential race Friday by announcing his candidacy and presenting himself as the best choice for restoring security and prosperity.

Omar Suleiman’s announcement was widely seen as a game changer in the landmark election scheduled for next month. The prospect of his return to power would have been laughable a year ago, when he vanished from public view after somberly announcing that the country’s longtime autocratic ruler was stepping down.

But much has changed since that afternoon of Feb. 11, 2011. Islamists have thrived in the country’s newly open political system, alarming secular Egyptians and Western nations that would like to see non-Islamists leading Egypt. In addition, a large segment of Egyptian society has come to yearn for the safety and relative prosperity that prevailed until the popular uprising sent the economy into a tailspin and eroded the pillars of the country’s police state.

Suleiman’s candidacy broadens a field of front-runners dominated by Islamists. Political analysts said his entry, coming just days after he publicly ruled out a presidential bid, suggests that the ruling military council opted to anoint him as a contender, possibly in response to the Muslim Brotherhood’s decision to field a candidate and robust support for more hard-line Islamist candidates. It offers Egyptians their clearest choice yet between the old order and the new: a contender who is an old hand of the Mubarak-era security establishment facing off against Islamists who were banned from politics under the government he served.

“It just became a more interesting race, because it has become increasingly clear the regime has not collapsed,” said Khaled Fahmy, chairman of the history department at the American University in Cairo. “This represents the realization that the standoff with Islamists in parliament is very serious to them.”

Suleiman, a former army general, has remained largely invisible since the final days of Mubarak’s rule, during which he served briefly as vice president. Unlike the ousted president and several of his senior loyalists, Suleiman has not been put on trial, and the ruling military council has shown no sign of wanting to hold him to account for any of the abuses of the old government.

The former spy master was among Washington’s closest backers in the Middle East in recent years, championing Egypt’s unpopular alliance with neighboring Israel. The agency he ran played a key role in the rendition of U.S. terrorism suspects, a program in which suspects were secretly flown to countries around the world for interrogation after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to leaked diplomatic cables and news reports.

Suleiman announced his decision to run for president in a statement published Friday afternoon on the Web site of the state-run newspaper al-Ahram. He attributed his change of heart to a mass show of support at a rally in the Abbasiya district of Cairo earlier in the day.

“I was touched by your strong stance and your insistence on changing the status quo,” Suleiman’s statement said. He added that he was running in response to Egyptians’ desire for “security, stability and prosperity.”

Shadi Hamid, an Egypt expert at the Brookings Doha Center, said Suleiman could emerge as a strong candidate if the military council, which continues to command widespread backing, manages to galvanize support for the former Mubarak loyalist among pro-military Egyptians and those wary of the prospect of a fundamentalist leader.

“He’ll have a chance of winning if SCAF puts its weight around the candidate,” Hamid said, referring to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. “We’ll have to wait and see how much coordination there is between Suleiman and SCAF.”

If his candidacy was, in fact, engineered by the country’s military chiefs, the move could prove a risky gamble, opening up a once-shadowy figure to close scrutiny.

“I’m excited because now all the atrocities he committed over the years will be under the spotlight for the next two months,” said Hossam Bahgat, a prominent human rights activist. “He is the only member of Mubarak’s close circle who has not only not been indicted, but is not even being questioned over anything.”

To get on the ballot for the May 24 vote, Suleiman, 75, must gather 30,000 signatures or secure an endorsement from 30 lawmakers by Sunday, the deadline to register.

The announcement marked the latest surprise in a presidential race that a year ago had just three presumed front-runners: well-known former Egyptian diplomats Amr Moussa and Mohamed ElBaradei; and Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, a moderate Islamist.

ElBaradei dropped out, and two prominent Islamists — the Muslim Brotherhood’s Khairat el-Shater and Hazem Abu Ismail, who enjoys the support of many in Egypt’s conservative Salafist community — emerged as credible rivals.

An opinion poll released this month by the al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies — which didn’t list Shater or Suleiman — has Moussa, the former head of the Arab League, in the lead with the support of 31 percent of the 1,200 Egyptians polled. Ismail ranked second, with the backing of 10 percent. Ismail is fighting to stay in the race amid allegations that his late mother was a U.S. citizen, which under Egyptian law would bar him from the country’s highest office.

Thousands of Ismail’s supporters thronged Tahrir Square after Friday prayers to demand that he be allowed to stay on the ballot. Many in the crowd said they saw Washington’s hand in the attempt to disqualify him.

“America is the number one player in what is happening in Egypt right now,” said Mohammed Hamdi, 45, an accountant who supports Ismail. “America wants a president under its wings that abides by its orders.”





2/05/2012

Russians stage rival protests over Putin

Tens of thousands of Russians defied bitter cold to demand fair elections in a march against Vladimir Putin's 12-year rule, while supporters of the prime minister staged a rival rally drawing comparable numbers.

Πηγή: The Times of India
By Reuters
Feb 5 2012

MOSCOW: Tens of thousands of Russians defied bitter cold in Moscow on Saturday to demand fair elections in a march against Vladimir Putin's 12-year rule, while supporters of the prime minister staged a rival rally drawing comparable numbers.

Smaller protests were held in other cities across the vast country maintaining pressure on Putin one month before a March 4 presidential election he is expected to win. Putin's public image was shaken in December by allegations of fraud in parliamentary elections and protests unthinkable a year ago.

Their breath turning to white vapor clouds in the frigid Moscow air, tens of thousands of protesters marched within sight of the red-brick Kremlin walls and towers, chanting "Russia without Putin!" and "Give us back the elections!"

Putin was president from 2000 until 2008, when he ushered Dmitry Medevedev into the Kremlin because of a constitutional bar on three successive terms as head of state. Putin became prime minister but remained the dominant leader.

Putin presents himself as a man of action working for the good of the people and dismisses rivals as divided and lacking in any realistic policies to overcome the country's problems of industrial decay and poor transport and communications.

On Saturday, he was 1,500 km (900 miles) from Moscow, promising angry residents of the Ural Mountains town of Roza the state would move 3,800 people from homes threatened by shifting ground on the edge of the biggest open-pit coal mine in Eurasia.

"You see what we are doing, we are dealing with concrete problems of the people who live here," Putin said when asked about the demonstrations.

Saturday's temperatures, far below freezing, tested the power and perseverance of a street protest movement fuelled by suspicions of fraud in a December parliamentary election and dismay among some Russians over Putin's plan to rule at least six more years.

In the capital, demonstrators bundled up against the cold marched down a broad central street, many wearing white ribbons symbols of protests whose main motto is "For Honest Elections." A digital clock flashed the temperature: minus 17 C (1 F).

"Not one vote for Putin!" Vladimir Ryzhkov, a liberal opposition leader, said to a roar of approval from the crowd at the rally that followed the march. Protesters packed a square across the river from the Kremlin, stamping and clapping to keep warm.

A patchwork alliance of disparate opposition leaders is trying to maintain momentum after tens of thousands turned out on December 10 and December 24 for the biggest opposition protests since Putin was first elected president in 2000.

Polls indicate Putin is all but certain to win the presidency despite a decline from previous popularity levels.
Opponents hope he will at least be forced into a runoff by falling short of a majority on March 4 and that persistent protests will undermine his authority, loosening his grip on power in a new six-year term and pushing him into concessions.

"We have already reached a point of no return. People have stopped being afraid and see how strong they are together," said Ivan Kositsky, 49. He said Putin "wants stability, but you can only find stability in the graveyard."

Kositsky wore an orange ribbon in a reference to the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine, where peaceful protests following allegations of widespread election fraud helped usher an opposition candidate to the presidency.

Opposition leaders said up to 120,000 people joined their protest in Moscow, which appeared smaller than that but as large as the December rallies that drew tens of thousands - suggesting their fears a cold snap might keep people away were unfounded.

Many protesters had banners making light of the bone-chilling weather and calling for Putin to go. "Down with the cold, down with Putin," one banner said. Others declared: "They froze our democracy" and "We are frozen in solidarity."

FOR PUTIN
Police said 138,000 people attended the pro-Putin rally a few km (miles) away in Moscow, but reporters estimated the crowd was smaller than that by tens of thousands, and attendance at demonstrations in support of the former KGB spy has previously been swelled by the authorities ferrying in sympathizers by bus.

Teachers have said they came under pressure from trade unions to attend the pro-Putin rally.

"Trade union representatives called us together and said at least five to 10 people from each school had to go (to the Putin rally)," said Sergei Bebchuk, a 54-year-old headteacher who ignored the request and attended the
opposition protest.

"I have something I believe in. We could not go there," he said, his daughter at his side with white ribbons in her hair.

Putin said Moscow's mayor had told him 190,000 attended the rally in his support there, and that while he did not rule out pressure had been applied, "to bring 134,000 or 190,000 people by applying pressure alone is impossible."
"It is totally obvious that people came to express their position. Their position is to support what we are doing. For me it is very important," Putin said. "I have said that I cannot work without it. I am really grateful."

At that pro-Putin rally, demonstrators carried posters saying "For Putin" with a check mark in a box next to his face. Another read "Putin led Russia out of civil war" and one said, "My children will live in Russia - I need Putin."

In keeping with Putin's warnings against revolutionary change and the anti-Western rhetoric he has employed in his campaign, the rally was billed as "anti-orange" - another reference to Ukraine, where Moscow has said Western-funded activists helped bring a pro-Western leader to power.

"My aim is to support the movement against the 'orange ones' - those America sends us to topple those in power and rock society," Kirill Domchenko, 25, a Moscow university student.

Putin in December accused the United States of encouraging opposition protests and said Western states were spending billions to influence Russian elections. He praised the 'anti-orange' demonstrators late on Friday and said "I share their views," Interfax reported.

MAINTAINING MOMENTUM
The main opposition protests were suspended over the long New Year holiday, when Russia comes to a halt. Opposition activists had been concerned that the protests might lose momentum after Putin, 59, ignored all their main demands.

The protesters want a rerun of the parliamentary election, the release of prisoners jailed for political reasons, dismissal of the central election commission chief, the registration of more political parties and other political reforms.

The Kremlin has promised to let more parties contest elections but has rejected its main demands. Ryzhkov told the crowd protests must continue until Putin gives in, and another protest is planned for one week before the election.

Crowds of a few hundred turned out to protest against Putin in other cities across Russia, although the number
protesting is still only a small part of the more than 140 million population.

In the Pacific port city of Vladivostok, demonstrators carried banners reading "Putin - out!" and "The crook is making for the throne again ... send him to a prison bunk."

The protesters are angered by allegations of fraud in a December 4 parliamentary election that was won by Putin's ruling United Russia party, albeit with a reduced majority in the lower house.

The plan by Putin and Medvedev to swap jobs after the presidential election is viewed by opposition supporters as openly flouting democracy.

"We are not sheep or cattle. We deserve respect," said Marat Yafyasov, 54, a lawyer who travelled from Yaroslavl, 250 km (155 miles) northeast of Moscow, to join the protest.

"We are out in the cold because we can't let this moment go, we have to keep the protest going."


1/21/2012

Protesters storm Libya's interim gov't headquarters

A man holds a pre-Gadhafi era national flag in Benghazi, Libya, Sunday, June 5, 2011.

Πηγή: CTV news
By AP
Jan 21 2012

BENGHAZI, Libya — About 200 Libyan protesters have stormed the grounds of the transitional government's headquarters and are demanding a meeting with the country's interim leaders.

The protesters used hand grenades Saturday to break through the gate and into the compound housing the National Transitional Council's headquarters in the eastern city of Benghazi.

They are banging on the building's doors and calling for an official to address them.

Residents in Benghazi, where the anti-Gadhafi uprising broke out in February, have been protesting for nearly two weeks, demanding transparency and justice from the country's new leaders.

Some say new elections laws drafted by the NTC do not reflect the demands of the general public.




1/19/2012

The Influence Industry: Activist groups want to undo ruling that led to ‘super PAC’ frenzy



Πηγή: Washington Post
By Dan Eggen
Jan 19 2012

Two years ago this week, the Supreme Court set the political world on its head by ruling that corporations could spend unlimited money on elections, rolling back decades of legal restrictions.

An array of liberal-leaning activist groups are marking the anniversary by launching new efforts to overturn the decision, including calls for a potential constitutional amendment.

The 5 to 4 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission effectively laid the groundwork for super PACs, the new independent groups that have overwhelmed the Republican presidential race with millions of dollars in negative advertising over the past few weeks.

The decision, issued Jan. 21, 2010, outraged Democrats and many watchdog groups, but they’ve had little success in doing anything about it over the past two years. Activists are hoping to try again by focusing on the difficult task of passing a constitutional amendment, which would require ratification by three-quarters of the states.

“We’re already at a point where the public overwhelmingly opposes the decision,” said Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, a watchdog group helping to spearhead the efforts. “The goal is to build a grass-roots movement that will eventually be able to shape the debate.”

Public Citizen is teaming up with local activists to stage about 300 rallies and other events, most of them on Friday or Saturday, targeting multinational companies around the country. Many are being billed as “Occupying the Corporations” protests, inspired by the anti-Wall Street demonstrations that have taken hold in recent months.

Common Cause also launched its own pro-amendment project this week, dubbed Amend2012 and chaired by Clinton administration labor secretary Robert Reich. It includes a petition drive opposing the Supreme Court’s judgment that corporations have the same rights as people when it comes to political speech.

“It’s time to stop the unlimited flow of corrupting money into our elections,” the group’s petition reads. “To do that, we need a constitutional amendment to reverseCitizens United and declare that only people are people.”

On another front, the Corporate Reform Coalition, a group of institutional investors and others, is backing a petition drive urging the Securities and Exchange Commission to require corporations to disclose political spending to shareholders.

These and other such efforts essentially serve as an acknowledgment that previous attempts at reform after the Citizens United decision failed miserably. In 2010, the White House and Democrats in Congress tried to pass legislation requiring fuller disclosure of political spending by corporations, but the changes were blocked by Senate Republicans.

Advocates for stricter campaign finance laws are also disgruntled by the Federal Election Commission, which frequently deadlocks along party lines and has given super PACs wide latitude. Several watchdog groups are conducting a petition drive urging President Obama to fill vacant FEC seats. The seats remain occupied by previous commissioners for a lack of nominees.

“While the courts did plenty to create this mess . . . the FEC bears much responsibility for making a bad situation disastrous,” Meredith McGehee, policy director at Campaign Legal Center, said in a recent statement. “With super PACs running amok, the Republican presidential primary is exhibit A of a system out of control, and the FEC is complicit in this auctioning of the White House.”

Conservatives in large part take a much different tack, viewing Citizens United as just one step toward a less-regulated election system. Republican front-runner Mitt Romney, while complaining about some of the ads put out by super PACs, has argued in recent days that contribution and spending limits should be removed for candidates as well.

“I would like to get rid of the campaign finance laws that were put in place,” Romney said at a debate Monday night in Myrtle Beach, S.C. “ . . . Let people make contributions they want to make to campaigns, let campaigns then take responsibility for their own words and not have this strange situation we have.”

Amendments to the Constitution must first be proposed by a two-thirds supermajority vote of both the House and the Senate. (Two-thirds of state legislatures can also call for a national convention, but the approach has never been used.) Then 38 states would have to ratify the amendment, through either their legislatures or state-level conventions.

Amendments are notoriously difficult to launch, and even more difficult to get ratified. The 27th Amendment, which limits increases in congressional pay, was first proposed in 1789 — and not ratified until 203 years later, in 1992.

Weissman and others say they are under no illusions about how difficult such an effort would be.

“I think everyone understands that winning a constitutional amendment is an uphill fight and a long-term struggle,” he said.


1/16/2012

ElBaradei withdraws from Egypt's presidential race



Πηγή: Irish Times
By MICHAEL JANSEN
Jan 16 2012

REFORMER MOHAMED ElBaradei has withdrawn from Egypt’s presidential race, saying he could not run for any office in the absence of a genuine democratic system.

“My conscience will not allow me to nominate myself for the presidency or any formal position outside a real democratic system that adheres to the essence of democracy not just its form,” he said.

Nobel laureate and former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Dr ElBaradei was seen as the most liberal of the declared candidates and a guarantor of the legitimacy of the coming presidential poll due to be conducted by the ruling military council. The council was formerly the backbone of the ousted Mubarak regime.

He praised the young people who died during last year’s uprising that ousted president Hosni Mubarak but condemned the course dictated by the military for the country’s transition from dictatorship to a multiparty system.

He has been especially critical of the army’s use of violent methods to contain dissent and stated that its actions, which mirror those employed during Mr Mubarak’s 30-year reign, “make us feel that the regime has not fallen yet.”

Dr ElBaradei said he would not withdraw from political life but would try to serve society “outside any positions of power, freed from the chains” imposed by the country’s current rulers.

Egyptian analysts suggest that his decision to pull out is due to the collapse of popular backing for his candidacy. However, he has never enjoyed the support given to front-runner Amr Moussa, a former foreign minister and Arab League chief. Many Egyptians criticise Dr ElBaradei for losing touch with the country while living and working abroad for decades.

Initially dubbed the “godfather” of the revolution by liberals when he assumed the role of elder statesman in initial dealings between the revolutionaries and the military, he disappointed many in the secular camp by failing to assert strong leadership and bring together the disparate forces of the revolution.

The Muslim Brotherhood, victor in Egypt’s parliamentary election, considers Dr ElBaradei “too liberal”, while the military was never likely to accept him due to his outspoken criticism of its actions.


1/02/2012

Libyans linked to Gaddafi can't run in election: draft

A child sings as people demand for transparency from the National Transitional Council (NTC) and its head Mustafa Abdel Jalil during a protest in the city center of Benghazi, December 16, 2011.

Πηγή: Reuters
By Mahmoud Habboush
Jan 2 2012

Libyans with ties to ousted leader Muammar Gaddafi will be banned from running in elections under a bill drafted by the country's new rulers.


Academics who wrote about Gaddafi's "Green Book," containing his musings on politics, economics and everyday life, will also be barred from running under the draft law, published online by the National Transitional Council (NTC) on Sunday night.

"This is a very important law because people are complaining that some of Gaddafi's figures still occupy high positions," said Abeir Imnena, a university professor among a number of legal experts, judges and lawyers involved in drafting the bill.

"This is to tell people that there's no room for them (Gaddafi supporters)."

Hundreds of people have taken to the streets of the capital Tripoli in the past few weeks to urge the new rulers to fire senior government officials they say have close links to Gaddafi.

The NTC, Libya's self-appointed but internationally-recognized interim leadership, said it would only sack those proved to have been involved in committing human rights abuses or stealing public funds.

The legislation would regulate the election of a national assembly charged with writing a new constitution and form a second caretaker government. It is expected to be finalized within a month, Imnena said.

Meanwhile, Libyans can leave their comments and proposals, the NTC has said, in a bid to involve civil society and move Libya away from militancy.

The NTC is grappling to disband dozens of rival militias with regional allegiances, more than two months after rebels captured and killed Gaddafi.

Interim Prime Minister Abdurrahim al-Keib confirmed on Monday that the election of the assembly would take place in June.

CONSTITUENCIES

The bill also bans former officials accused of torturing Libyans or embezzling public funds, active members of the Revolutionary Guard, and opposition members who made peace with Gaddafi.

It gives women 20 seats in the 200-member national assembly.

Imnena, who teaches political science at the University of Benghazi, said finalizing the election law would be followed by the appointment of an election commission to oversee the poll.

The draft law, however, did not include details about dividing the country into constituencies. Instead it left the task to the election commission, stipulating that the size and population of each of the country's districts should be taken into consideration.

Experts said the new constituencies should also take into account the needs of minorities such as the Amazigh, or Berber, whose language and culture were suppressed under Gaddafi.

Libyan experts say the candidates will run as independents because the country does not have a law regulating political parties, which were banned under Gaddafi.


12/18/2011

Dmitry Medvedev tells Barack Obama about US criticism of Russian polls

Πηγή: DNA
BY IANS
Dec 18 2011

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev during a telephonic conversation with his US counterpart Barack Obama said that Washington's comments over Russia's allegedly rigged parliamentary polls were inadmissible.

Speaking at the meeting with the members of the ruling United Russia party, Medvedev said that Friday he told Obama that the US officials' assessment of Russian elections "does not have any significance for us".

On Dec 6, two days after Russian parliamentary elections that sparked criticism across the country over the alleged mass ballot stuffing and vote fraud in favour of the United Russia party, the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Russia's polls were "neither free nor fair".

"When on the next or the second day [after the elections]… there are rebukes in the worst traditions of the Cold War, it is inadmissible. It is not a reset at all," Medvedev said. "The Department of State is not a Russian office."

Obama and Medvedev had a telephone conversation Friday, Kremlin said. Obama congratulated the Russian leader on Russia's admission to the World Trade Organisation and voiced the United States' intention to continue cooperation.

Medvedev reiterated Saturday that Russia would act on the international political arena according to its interests.

Speaking about nationwide protest rallies, Medvedev told the United Russia members that the protests should be carried out within the law.

Protests over alleged mass electoral fraud at the Dec 4 parliamentary elections continued in Moscow Saturday, as more than a thousand people attended a rally near the Kremlin.

It is the third authorised mass protest in Moscow. The next rally is scheduled for Dec 24 at the Sakarov Avenue. More than 25,000 people have signed up so far to a Facebook page announcing the rally.


12/16/2011

AP poll: Obama re-election chance 50-50


Πηγή: Panarmenian Net
Dec 16 2011

Entering 2012, President Barack Obama's re-election prospects are essentially a 50-50 proposition, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll. It found that most Americans say the president deserves to be voted out of office even though they have concerns about the Republican alternatives.

Obama's overall standing in the poll suggests he could be in jeopardy of losing re-election even as the survey showed that public's outlook on the economy appears to be improving. For the first time since spring, more people said the economy got better in the past month than said it got worse. The president's approval rating on unemployment shifted upward - from 40 percent in October to 45 percent in the latest poll - as the jobless rate fell to 8.6 percent last month, its lowest level since March 2009.

But Obama's approval rating on his handling of the economy overall remains stagnant: Thirty-nine percent approve and 60 percent disapprove.

Heading into his re-election campaign, the president faces a conflicted public. It does not support his steering of the economy, the most dominant issue for Americans, or his overhaul of health care, one of his signature accomplishments, but it also is grappling with whether to replace him with Republican contenders Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich.

The AP said that the poll found Americans were evenly divided over whether they expect Obama to be re-elected next year.

For the first time, the poll found that a majority of adults, 52 percent, said Obama should be voted out of office while 43 percent said he deserves another term. The numbers mark a reversal since last May, when 53 percent said Obama should be re-elected while 43 percent said he didn't deserve four more years.

Obama's overall job approval stands at a new low, with 44 percent approving and 54 percent disapproving. The president's standing among independents is worse: Thirty-eight percent approve while 59 percent disapprove. Among Democrats, the president holds steady with an approval rating of 78 percent while only 12 percent of Republicans approve of the job he's doing.

12/08/2011

Ultraconservative Islamist Party Reshapes Egypt's Politics

Egypt's elections poster

Πηγή: The Daily Beast
By Ursula Lindsey
Dec 8 2011

El Nour, the political party of the Salafis, the ultra-orthodox extreme of Islam, won a quarter of the vote in Egypt's last elections, success that alarmed even the conservative Muslim Brotherhood.


When a coalition of brand-new, ultraconservative Islamist parties won a quarter of the vote in the first round of Egypt's parliamentary elections, liberals were dismayed, and even the Muslim Brotherhood—the country's well-known and long-established Islamist group—was disconcerted.

But in the village of Ghit al-Nasara, in the northeastern Nile Delta, no one was surprised.

The village on the outskirts of the port town of Damietta is the hometown of Sheikh Mohammed El Taweel, a well-known local Salafi preacher and a candidate for the new El Nour (The Light) party. This week—as El Taweel faced off with a Brotherhood candidate in a heated runoff—the town was plastered with his posters, showing a middle-aged man with an untrimmed beard and a gleaming white skullcap. Minibuses adorned with his face and packed full of voters looped the distance between the village's main street and the nearby polling station.

“He's a good man. He serves the community,” says Atef El Elfi. “He prays, he builds schools and mosques, he won a prize for memorizing the Quran.”

Asked about the Nour party's political program, El Elfi smiled and shrugged: “I know him personally. I'm not concerned with his program. I don't understand politics.”

Salafis are ultra-orthodox Islamists who say they want to live as much as possible as the Prophet Mohammed's Companions (the Salafis) did. Men wear untrimmed beards and open sandals. Women don the niqab. Salafis advocate complete gender segregation and speak of Saudi Arabia as a model.

A coalition of secular parties won about 15 percent of the vote across Egypt, but in Ghit al-Nasara, as in much of the country, the competition has been between Islamist and Islamist.

And it has been more intense than many expected. In the local offices of the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, party members didn't bother disguising their surprise and annoyance at the Salafis' electoral success.

“We have have 80 years of experience,” said Yasser Daoud. “Their candidate has been in politics a few months.”

Freedom and Justice has emerged as the strongest party in postrevolutionary Egypt, capturing at least 40 percent of the vote. Disciplined, well-organized, and with a long history of opposition to the Mubarak regime, the Muslim Brotherhood was always expected to do well.

Yet some Egyptians are suspicious of the Brotherhood, calling it secretive, arrogant, and devoted to its own interests. The Salafis appear to have picked up the support of many pious, first-time voters.

“Imagine you are a 70-year-old woman in the countryside voting for the first time,” said Khaled al-Asily, the secretary-general of the moderate Al Wasat party in Damietta. “At the door of the polling station you meet a Nour party person who tells you, 'God sees everything. Choose So-and-So and you'll go to heaven!' ”

The Brotherhood itself has long been accused of manipulating voters with religion. But while the Freedom and Justice party's program is socially conservative and religiously based, its main focus is on economic development and political reform. Their new party supports “a civil state with an Islamic reference” and it abandoned the Brotherhood's old motto—"Islam is the Solution”—in favor of less religiously loaded slogans like “Let's Build Egypt Together.”

"Salafis have entered the political arena while withholding support for basic freedoms and democratic principles. One prominent Salafi sheikh said recently that democracy—the rule of men rather than God—is a sin."

Now it's the Brothers who complain that the Nour party is using religion to sway voters. “The simple people in the countryside are confused by a superficial, religious appearance,” says Daoud. “Whoever has this appearance they think is a religious authority and someone who can bring about change.”

Muslim Brothers also allege that their Salafi competitors benefited from the support of the disbanded former ruling party. “I've spent 20 years facing the National Democratic Party in elections and I know them all,” says Muslim Brother Taher El Ghobashy. “They are all supporting the Salafis now.”

Other Brothers, in their frustration and confusion over the Salafi gains, looked further afield, suggesting that “members of the former regime, some inside the military council, the Saudi and American intelligence services” all might be behind their fellow Islamists' impressive organization.

But Salafis have been consolidating their influence in Egyptian society for decades. El Taweel established the local chapter of the Ansar El Sunnaa Salafi charity—in 1972. He has helped build 77 mosques in the area since then, all of them Salafi-controlled. Salafi charities rival the Brotherhood's own benevolent network.

At the women's polling station, female El Nour supporters—all wearing theniqab—listed the many Salafi-sponsored charitable activities: help for the sick and the poor; financial assistance to widows, divorcées, and young women in need of marriage trousseaus; and of course plenty of religious instruction.

“They taught us right from wrong,” one woman said.

Taking a page from the Muslim Brotherhood's electoral playbook, some of the women sat outside the polling station with a laptop with a database of voters, ready to answer questions.

"There is no difference between religion and politics. The Prophet was also the leader and founder of the Islamic state," said Nour supporter Sawsan. Once the Salafis are in Parliament, “banks will become Islamic banks,” explained Doa. “There will be no interest. In schools the Quran will be a fundamental part of the curriculum. In all matters the government will apply Islamic law."

It is their extensive network of mosques and charities that has given the Salafis such an electoral advantage, say their opponents. And while El Taweel and his supporters insist all their activities are funded “from our pockets,” many here allege the group is financed by religious conservatives in the Arab Gulf. According to an ongoing judicial investigation, Ansar El Sunna received about $50 million from benefactors in Kuwait and Qatar this year. Critics of the Salafi movement suggest this is just the tip of the iceberg.

And for years, the Mubarak regime gave Salafis “a green light to work in the mosques," says El Ghobashy. While members of the Brotherhood were jailed for their political activism, he says, Salafis were allowed to operate because of their political quietism: they condemned demonstrations and formally forbid challenging rulers.

Salafis say they were also persecuted by the Mubarak regime but admit that they traded in political participation for religious influence. "If we'd entered politics, they would have prevented us from proselytizing and from preaching" says Taweel. "So we left politics aside, because there was no use."

Most galling to many is that during the January 25 revolution, many Salafi sheikhs told their congregations not to participate and criticized the protests. “When we were in the street,” says al-Asily, “They were telling us, 'What are you doing? This is forbidden.'”

Now, however, the ultra-orthodox Islamists say they need to participate in shaping the country's future and in particular in writing its constitution. “Our goal in entering politics is to protect the Islamic identity of Egypt,” said Taweel, which he alleges is under attack from liberals and foreign forces.

Salafis have entered the political arena while withholding support for basic freedoms and democratic principles. One prominent Salafi sheikh said recently that democracy—the rule of men rather than God—is a sin. Another said that Egyptians novelist and Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz promoted prostitution and atheism. And yet another told a female reporter that women's faces should be covered because they are “like their sexual organs.”

On the posters for the Nour party lists across the country, the single female candidate that must be included by law is represented by a blank square or a stylized flower.

But the Salafis insist that they are not extremists because their goal is to guide society to a correct application of Islam through persuasion, not force. “We will never tell someone they have to wear the hijab,” said Nour supporter Doa. “I will tell you the principle; if you agree, good. If you don't, you're free. But we won't force people.”

“If our party is fanatic, we would not receive you here,” a Nour party member told this reporter. “You are a lady, you are not Muslim and you don't wear a scarf on your hair. And we are willing to talk to you. This is a clue that our party is not fanatic.”

In this week's runoff, the Freedom and Justice candidate finally beat El Taweel. In this case, the Brotherhood's greater political experience and more moderate message seems to have won out. Yet that's small consolation to the country's marginalized revolutionary youth groups, secular and liberal parties, and the Coptic Christian minority.

With Islamists winning over 60 percent of seats in the Parliament so far, religion seems set to dominate and define Egypt's new political environment.

“You have two parties in America?” said Eman al-Aly, a Freedom and Justice volunteer at a polling station in Damietta. “So do we. Freedom and Justice and Nour.”


BOMBSHELL: US Caught Meddling in Russian Elections!


Πηγή: Global Research
By Tony Cartalucci
Dec 6 2011

What would Americans say if they found their polling stations and certain political parties entirely infiltrated by Chinese money, Chinese observers, and Chinese-backed candidates promoting China's interests in an AMERICAN election? The answer ranges from incarceration, to trials featuring charges ranging from fraud, to sedition and even treason with sentences ranging from decades to life in prison, perhaps even death, as well as possible military action for what could easily be considered an act of war.

Indeed, the attempted subversion of a foreign nation and/or meddling in its elections are acts of war, an act of war the United States government through its various "Non-Governmental Organizations" (NGOs) have been committing on and off for decades around the globe. In fact, the very "Arab Spring" is a geopolitical conflagration tipped off by this vast network of Western backed NGOs.

The New York Times in its article, "U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings," clearly stated as much when it reported, "a number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington."

The Times would continue by explaining, "the Republican and Democratic institutes are loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties. They were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations. The National Endowment receives about $100 million annually from Congress. Freedom House also gets the bulk of its money from the American government, mainly from the State Department."

These same NGOs have also just recently played a central role in Myanmar, blocking the construction of a mega-dam that would have begun the development of the nation's rural areas, provided electricity for export and domestic use, and help irrigate surrounding agricultural land. These NGOs are currently creating a social divide in Thailand to subvert an 800 year old independent political institution that has for centuries weathered Western encroachment. There is also documented evidence of these NGOs attempting to destabilize the government of Malaysia and reinstall IMF minion Anwar Ibrahim back into power.

In Russia's neighboring country and ally, Belarus, this network of US-funded NGOs have attempted to start a "Belarusian Spring" to overthrow leader Alexander Lukashenko, who has adamently opposed NATO's creep toward its, and Russia's borders. And now Russia itself has just rooted out a plot by these very same NGOs creeping in and around the nation's political institutions, in an attempt to subvert and replace them.

Russia's Long Fight Against US-funded Subversion.

This is not the first time Russia has faced this insidious creep from abroad. After the fall of the Soviet Union, there proceeded a lawless free-for-all where foreigners began rushing in in an attempt to create their own order out of the chaos. Leading this charge was billionaire oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky who fashioned an "Open Russian Foundation" and even had western corporate-financier elitists Jacob Rothschild and Henry Kissinger chair its board of directors. In a now all too familiar scenario, Khodorkovsky and his networks of foreign-funded NGOs attempted to consolidate and transfer Russia's wealth, power, and the destiny of its people into the hands of Wall Street and London's global "corporatatorship."



Image: Khodorkovsky, safely behind bars. In Russia, Wall Street and London's mafia banksters go to prison.

Russia, however, was not entirely defenseless. In a devastating backlash, Khodorkovsky was thrown into a Siberian prison where he remains to this day, while other oligarchs serving Western interests scattered like cockroaches back to London and New York. In a hollow attempt to portray Russia's efforts to preserve its national sovereignty as "human rights abuses," Wall Street and London assembled a legal defense led by globalist lawyer Robert Amsterdam, who while still representing Khodorkovsky, is also defending another loser in Wall Street's game to place their puppets in positions of power around the globe, Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand.

Most recently, as Russia's elections approach, AFP has claimed that NGOs such as US NED-funded Golos and New Times' slon.ru, which regularly features columns by the now jailed and above mentioned Khodorkovsky, were attacked in order to prevent the exposure of "mass election fraud." Why opposition groups and foreign-funded NGOs who have a direct vested interest in preventing Putin's United Russia Party from obtaining a clean victory at the polls, should be trusted to reveal "mass election fraud" in the first place, is never quite explained by AFP.

NED's official website lists an astounding number of meddlesome NGOs conducting activities across the Russian Federation that no American in their right mind would allow on US soil. Golos is just one of many NGOs funded by the United States government, overseen by the US Embassy in Russia, and used to meddle in the sovereign internal affairs of their nation.

AFP reported, "Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, whose United Russia party has won Sunday's polls but with a reduced majority, has denounced non-governmental organisations like Golos, comparing them to the disciple Judas who betrayed Jesus." And indeed, Golos is certifiably betraying the Russian people by taking foreign money and pursing a foreign agenda, masquerading as "pro-democracy" crusaders.

Golos' activities, mirroring those in the US-engineered Arab Spring, include an online "Map of Violations" site detailing "claims" of fraud across Russia, in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of upcoming elections Putin and is party are predicted to easily win. Golos' Liliya Shibanova described their "Map of Violations" project as being a place where people could upload any information or evidence of election violations. This, being far from actual evidence, again mirrors the same tactics of manipulating public opinion in the midst of uprisings around the world, fueled by identical foreign-funded organizations where baseless claims of abuse, violence, and "human rights" violations made up the entirety of accusations then used by Western governments to diplomatically and militarily (in the case of Libya and now Syria) pressure targeted nations.

As in Belarus, where the the vice president of NED-funded FIDH, and ring leader of foreign-funded sedition within the Eastern European country, was imprisoned for over 4 years, in Russia, the government is openly exposing the enemy by name. This has also happened in Malaysia, where the ruling government has outed the "Bersih Clean and Fair Elections" movement as a conspiracy of foreign-corporate-financier interests aimed at destabilizing the country and installing a more favorable, proxy regime led by IMF minion Anwar Ibrahim.

Russian Subversion Coordinated by US Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul.

Russia would also wisely turn their attention to the US Embassy and recently confirmed Ambassador Michael McFaul, who serves on the board of directors ofFreedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy, both now implicated in directly interfering in Russia's sovereign affairs.




Photo: Michael McFaul, confirmed in November as US Ambassador to Russia, immediately set out to work, not to represent the interests, aspirations, and good will of the American people, but to execute the agenda of corporate-financier oligarchs, who in October sang praises regarding his accomplished background in foreign agitation and the possibilities his presence in Russia could yield. It also should be noted that McFaul is a Senior Associate of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, fully funded by the Fortune 500, Soros' Open Society, and other corporate-funded foundations.

It was warned during October 2011 in "Agitator Nominated for Next US “Ambassador” to Russia," as corporate-financier interests voiced their recommendations for McFaul that:

"The Brookings Institution recently published a “letter of recommendation” of sorts for McFaul, titled, “Give the Next Russian Ambassador a Powerful Tool to Guard Human Rights.” Already out of the gates, the article is disingenuously using the concept of “human rights” to leverage US interests over Russia. Written by Brookings’ own arch-Neo-Conservative Robert Kagan and Freedom House President David Kramer, the piece begins by immediately calling on the US Senate to confirm McFaul.

Kagan and Kramer claim the US should then arm McFaul with a bill to “sanction” Russian officials accused of “human rights abuses.” Judging from previous US-Russian relations, and in particular, Robert Amsterdam’s transparent, almost cartoonish crusade for his jailed client, Mikhail Khodorovsky, it can be assumed these “abuses” are referring to the jailing of political operatives for grave criminal activities while in the process of serving US corporate-financier interests.

The Brookings piece goes on to enumerate McFaul’s “merits” which include, “democracy promotion” (read: extraterritorial meddling), meeting with “civil society” representatives both in Russia and in neighboring nations (read: conspiring with US-funded NGOs and political opposition leaders), as well as having a good rapport with Russian opposition activists operating in Washington. Brookings notes in particular how important it is to have McFaul in Russia, on the ground to give his “assessment” of up-coming Russian elections. Unspoken, but sure to trickle through the headlines in coming months will be McFaul’s “democracy promotion” on behalf of select opposition parties in Russia’s political landscape.

As if to alleviate any doubt regarding just what Brookings means by “human rights abuses,” Kagan and Kramer then cite the case of UK financier operative Sergei Magnitsky of Hermitage Captial Mangement, an enterprise that while operating primarily in Russian markets, maintained its headquarters in the Cayman Islands.

Magnitsky was arrested and imprisoned over tax evasion and tax fraud, and would die of illness while in prison. The US and UK would predictably trump up the circumstances surrounding the death of Magnitsky, with corporate foundation-funded Redress (page 28) of the UK submitting a “report” to the UN in yet another classic example of leveraging issues of “human rights” against a target nation to serve Western interests. This is but a taste of what is to come with McFaul presiding over the next leg of Anglo-American global destabilization.

Brookings’ Kagan and Freedom House’s Kramer have nominated McFaul with the intention of further meddling in Russia’s sovereign affairs, as well as destabilizing its neighbors in a bid to hedge Russia’s reemergence as a sovereign world power, or perhaps even in an attempt to play a grand strategy of global tension, forcing the besieged developing world to consolidate under the West’s more overt attacks, only for the “union” to be co-opted and integrated into the Wall Street-London “international order” at a later point in time. Either way, McFaul does not represent the ideals, principles, or laws of the American people or the US Constitution, nor does he represent universal values of respecting national sovereignty.

His confirmation by the US Senate will indicate duplicity amongst the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and a further divergence between their actions and the will and aspirations of the American people who put them in office. McFaul represents a corporate-financier elite and their agenda of building an “international order” (read: empire) at the cost of yet more American treasure and lives, leaving an immensely wealthy elite lording over a destitute American majority.

By exposing both McFaul’s true “credentials” and intentions, as well as who he really works for and why, and by systematically boycotting and replacing the consumerist troughs that fuel this corporate-financier oligarchy we can rectify this obvious and ever-expanding divergence between what is best for America and what is pursued by the oligarchs that presume dominion over us."
Russia and a growing number of other nations are openly exposing and holding accountable agents of sedition operating in their country, sent and funded by US tax payers' money. It is time for the other shoe to drop, and for the people of the West to hold their governments accountable. As targeted nations begin exposing and jailing members of this global conspiracy, likewise the West must begin exposing the disingenuous peddlers of this agenda - namely the board of directors and trustees organizing these ploys and dolling out the funds used in this global destabilization, and hold them duly accountable for using tax payers' money to fund political chaos abroad while economic and social decay consume Americans and Europeans at home.