Tag Archives: national assembly

Hungarian left unites, but will it be enough to stop Orbán?

mesterházy

As Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán hopes to consolidate his hold on Hungarian government in the country’s April 6 elections, the Hungarian center/left is uniting in a broad anti-Orbán coalition.Hungary Flag Icon

Under the banner of Osszefogas (‘Unity’), five of Hungary’s center-left parties will band together behind the prime ministerial candidacy of Attila Mesterházy (pictured above, center), the leader of Hungary’s largest opposition party, the Magyar Szocialista Párt (MSzP, Hungarian Socialist Party).

The coalition brings together four relatively new groups:

  • Együtt 2014 (E14, Together 2014) is a new social democratic party founded in October 2012 by former prime minister Gordon Bajnai, a Socialist who governed Hungary s somewhat of a technocratic caretaker between April 2009 and May 2010, when which Orbán came to power with a supermajority.  Bajnai’s government tried to steer a course through crippling budget austerity and an economy that hit its nadir with a 6.8% contraction in 2009.  From the outset, Bajnai (pictured above, far left) has advocated a united anti-Orbán front for the 2014 elections.
  • Párbeszéd Magyarországért (PM, Dialogue for Hungary) is a green liberal party founded in February 2013 as a breakway faction of Lehet Más a Politika (LMP, Politics Can Be Different), another green party founded in 2009.  PM’s leaders are Timea Szabó and Benedek Jávor, the latter an environmental lawyer and botanist.  The party has, since March 2013, been allied with E14 in advance of this year’s elections.
  • Demokratikus Koalíció (DK, Democratic Coalition) is the party of Ferenc Gyurcsány, prime minister between 2004 and 2009, and it was founded in October 2011 when Gyurcsány (pictured above, center, behind Mesterházy) left the Socialists, taking with him 10 of the Socialists’ 59 seats in the National Assembly.  Gyurcsány’s decision to unite under Mesterházy is particularly helpful for the anti-Orbán opposition because Gyurcsány remains more well-known than Mesterházy.  Even though Mesterházy led the (disastrous) 2010 electoral effort, Gyurcsány has more governing experience and political canny.  Gyurcsány, who came to power at a time when Hungary’s budget deficit was spiraling out of control (even in pre-crisis days), resigned in 2009 after introducing ever harsher budget reforms in line with a 2008 financing agreement with the International Monetary Fund.  Gyurcsány’s budget reforms, and his attempt to modernize the Hungarian health-care system, alienated him from his own party. 
  • The Magyar Liberális Párt (Hungarian Liberal Party) was founded in April 2013 as a pro-European, liberal party by Gábor Fodor, a former education minister in the mid-1990s and an environmental minister in 2007-08.  Fodor (pictured above, far right) was the the final leader of the Alliance of Free Democrats/Liberal Party, a predecessor to the current party that divided in 2008, when the liberal coalition lost the last of its 20 seats in the National Assembly.

Though the green LMP hasn’t joined the coalition, the five-party front is demonstrating about as much unity as you could expect — and much more than the alternative, much feared a month ago, that Orbán would take advantage of the disunity to win an outsized supermajority in the National Assembly. 

In the current 386-member National Assembly, Orbán’s ruling conservative party, Fidesz – Magyar Polgári Szövetség (Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Alliance) controls 226 seats.  Together with its ally, Kereszténydemokrata Néppárt (KdNp, Christian Democratic People’s Party), which today has become more a satellite of Fidesz than a truly independent party, Orbán controls 263 seats.  That’s a supermajority of just over two-thirds, and that’s permitted Orbán to introduce constitutional reforms and other laws that have strengthened his hold on power and undermined Hungary’s democratic institutions.

The Socialists control just 48 seats, and the far-right nationalist Jobbik Magyarországért Mozgalom (Jobbik) controls 43 seats.

Under new electoral rules, the National Assembly will be reduced from 386 seats to just 199 seats.  Unlike the prior system, where just over half of the seats were determined by proportional representation, the new system tilts slightly more toward plurality districts — 106 seats will be determined in single-member districts by first-past-the-post voting.  Another 93 seats will be determined by party-list proportional representation (with a 5% threshold for parties and a 10% threshold for coalitions).  In an election with five center-left parties competing against each other as much as against Orbán, Fidesz remained the overwhelming favorite to with the 106 plurality seats.  So the unification of the center-left opposition makes a nearly impossible race merely a tough race.

A January 15 IPSOS poll shows Fidesz with around 48% of the vote, the Hungarian Socialists with 27%, Jobbik with 11% (far below the troublingly high 17% it won in the April 2010 elections) and other parties in single digits.  But when you add the new Unity coalition totals together, Fidesz leads by a more narrow margin of 48% to 37% (DK and E14 each win 5% of the vote.

If the election were held tomorrow, Fidesz would still win, but the Unity coalition might together win seats that would otherwise fall to Fidesz.  In other words, Mesterházy and the united opposition would turn a landslide defeat into a robust defeat.

But is there a way to actually win the election against Orbán? Or does Fidesz have a lock on April’s elections?  Continue reading Hungarian left unites, but will it be enough to stop Orbán?

Kuwait’s elections won’t change the fact of the emir’s semi-authoritarian dominance

kuwaitmilitary

Kuwait, the oil-wealthy emirate that has for the past 20 years served as the chief base of U.S. military operations in the Middle East, will hold its third parliamentary election since February 2012 on Saturday, though the vote is unlikely to solve a growing political crisis over legitimacy and governance. kuwait

Since independence from the United Kingdom in 1961, Kuwait has been ruled primarily by its emir, who has hailed since from the ruling House of Sabah, which has held some form of power in Kuwait since the early 18th century.  Though Kuwait likes to style itself as a constitutional monarchy, the emir wields much more power than the National Assembly (Majlis Al-Umma, مجلس الأمة‎), which has at times been disbanded by the emir when its role proved too controversial.  That means that no matter the outcome of Kuwait’s newest elections, the current emir, Sabah IV Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah (or simply, Sabah IV), will continue to rule Kuwait.  The emir, rather than the National Assembly, chooses the prime minister — since December 2011, that has been Jaber Al-Mubarak Al-Hamad Al-Sabah, also a member of the ruling family.

Opposition groups, including both secular liberals that are participating in the election, and Sunni Islamists who have chosen to boycott the election, have broadly called for a more balanced constitutional monarchy with greater power held by elected officials.

That doesn’t mean elections to the National Assembly are necessarily worthless — parliamentary elections in 2006 saw the rise of a majority of opposition figures to the 50-seat parliament.  But Saturday’s elections will be plagued by an opposition divided over whether to boycott the elections, with many groups who decided to boycott the December 2012 now participating this time around.  (It’s worth noting that parties, as we understand them, do not exist as a formal matter in Kuwait, so candidates run chiefly as independents affiliated with Sunni, Shiite, liberal, tribal or other groups.)

The elections are the latest iteration of a gradual crisis of governance that began with Arab Spring protests that engulfed the entire region throughout 2011 — Sabah IV dissolved the National Assembly in December 2011 and his prime minister resigned after tens of thousands of protestors took to the streets to protest corruption.

The following February 2012 elections marked a victory for Kuwaiti’s opposition groups, but Kuwait’s constitutional court ruled that the prior dissolution of the National Assembly and the February elections were invalid, reinstating the prior parliament pending new elections set for December 2012.

Many opponents, including the Sunni Islamists, boycotted the December elections, which marked the lowest turnout in Kuwaiti history — around 40%, down from about 60% in February.  Opposition groups rejected the revision of election rules that would have made it more difficult to win (including, for example, a change that reduced each voter’s votes from four to just one).  The December elections, however, were also ruled invalid by the constitutional court just last month, thereby leading to the July elections.

But a huge part of the opposition are boycotting these elections as well, which has led to renewed apathy in the days leading up to the campaign:

“This is an election without any soul,” Shafeeq Ghabra, a political science professor at Kuwait University, said by phone. “People have lost interest in overall results and mechanisms, and are realizing that not much will come of it.” The result will be “a fragmented set of individuals with no coherent political program.”

Among the groups boycotting the election, both in December and again now is the largest Islamic movement in Kuwait, the Islamic Constitutional Movement, or Hadas ( الحركة الدستورية الإسلامية, Al-Haraka Al-Dosturiya Al-Islamiyah), which you can think of as the Kuwaiti variant of the Muslim Brotherhood, though the Kuwaiti movement’s once-strong ties to the Egyptian Brotherhood are today virtually non-existent.  The current Hadas movement is comprised of a new, younger generation of Islamists that were forged out of the experience of the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and who had no qualms about fully engaging in Kuwaiti politics.  The Islamic Salafi Alliance (Arabic: التحالف الإسلامي السلفي), a more hardline conservative Sunni group, is also boycotting the election.

The secular, liberal National Democratic Alliance (التحالف الديمقراطي الوطني, Al-Tehalef Al-Dimoqrati Al-Watani) will, however, contest the elections, as will the conservative Bedouin tribes that boycotted the December vote.  A number of Kuwait’s top Shiite political groups will also participate in the vote, which isn’t surprising, given that the emirate is Shiite as well.  Kuwait, like neighboring Iraq, is comprised of followers of both major branches of Islam — Sunnis comprise about 60% to 70% of the population, while Shiite Muslims comprise between 30% and 40%.  The divide over whether to boycott elections means that Shiite representation in the National Assembly is likely to skew greater, because Sunni groups are disproportionately boycotting the vote.

The greater narrative, though, is that the split among Kuwait’s various opposition groups plays right into the royal family’s hands, which has successfully devised strategies to divide the opposition.  And the greater hallmarks to watch for in the aftermath of Saturday’s election won’t necessarily be the results of a vote that have been boycotted by large portions of the electorate, but rather the turnout and how both boycotting and non-boycotting opposition groups respond to the aftermath of the election.  Far more important than the vote itself will be the nature of the protests that are likely to accompany it — and whether those protests will unite or divide Kuwait’s opposition groups, regardless of which groups are now boycotting the election. Continue reading Kuwait’s elections won’t change the fact of the emir’s semi-authoritarian dominance

More about Pakistan’s ‘milestone’ and a preview of its upcoming May 11 elections

zardari

Last weekend, Pakistan’s prime minister Raja Pervez Ashraf heralded the completion of the first full government in Pakistan’s history since partition from India and independence in 1947.Pakistan Flag Icon

Today, Pakistan’s president Asif Ali Zardari (pictured above) announced that new elections for Pakistan’s National Assembly (ایوان زیریں پاکستان‎), the lower house of the Majlis-e-Shoora ( مجلس شوریٰ‎)Pakistan’s parliament, will be held on May 11.

Before jumping into an analysis of Pakistan’s upcoming election, let’s first debunk a few myths.

While the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP, پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی‎) deserves some credit in crawling to the five-year finish line and therefore, the end of its term, it’s far from clear that Pakistan has approached anything like a mature democracy, despite Ashraf’s claims that democracy is here to stay for Pakistan. There are reasons to believe that the winner of the May 11 elections might not be as lucky as the previous government, so self-congratulation is quite premature.

Moreover, most decision-making power for truly life-and-death issues lies in the hands of either Pakistan’s military or the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and even then, their power doesn’t extend entirely throughout the entire country — it’s especially weak in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) along Pakistan’s northwestern border with Afghanistan.

But it still means that the chief of army staff since 2007 (and director general of the ISI from 2004 to 2007), Ashfaq Kayani (pictured below), is more powerful than Ashraf or even Zardari, even as he’s tried to institute military reforms to reduce the military’s direct role in politics and has pledged to keep the military from interfering in the May elections.  His current term as chief of army staff expires in November 2013.

kayani

The PPP came to power after elections in February 2008, following the end of a nine-year military rule by Pakistani general Pervez Musharraf.  Those elections followed the return and subsequent assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the former prime minister who had returned to Pakistan in late 2007 following Musharraf’s National Reconciliation Ordinance (which attempted to provide a blanket immunity against former political leaders with respect to corruption) in order to run in the upcoming elections.

Ashraf (pictured below) has been prime minister for less than a year, taking over after a showdown among Pakistan’s Supreme Court, on the one hand, and Zardari and former prime minister Yousuf Raza Gillani, on the other hand, over corruption charges.  Zardari, Pakistan’s president and the Bhutto’s widower, became Pakistan’s president in September 2008, and remains the key power broker within the PPP, though his official power is waning after 2010 constitutional reforms transferred much of the power of the presidency to the prime minister.  Zardari’s term will end in September 2013.

ashraf

In his address to Pakistanis on Saturday night, Ashraf admitted that the government has not been able to ‘provide rivers of milk honey,’ but it’s nonetheless attempted to tackle the myriad problems of the predominantly Muslim country of 180 million people, the world’s sixth-most populous.

Those problems include some of the world’s worst corruption (which is very much a bipartisan endeavor in Pakistan), and they include continuous military tension with India, which most recently flared up last month.

Pakistan’s economy has slowed from the Musharraf years, in part due to the abandonment of privatization in favor of a more corporatist state capitalism model championed by Gillani’s government.  More now than ever, relatively weak economic growth plagues Pakistan, even in light of rapid inflation. Furthermore, the PPP government hasn’t made incredible progress on any of the country’s longstanding development issues, including uneven access to water and electricity, widespread poverty, widespread unemployment, illiteracy and poor health care.

That’s all before you come to the issue of global terrorism and Pakistan’s role in harboring some of the world’s most determined Islamic radicals — it was a compound in Abbottabad, remember, where U.S. forces ambushed al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in May 2011.

So, no, there’s not much ‘milk and honey’ these days in Pakistan — it ranked as the 13th most failed state in the Fund for Peace’s failed state index in 2012.

Despite a shaky foundation for respecting democratically elected governments, Pakistan features relatively robust political activity that breaks down on a heavily regional basis, and the PPP is far from assured of winning a second consecutive term in office. Continue reading More about Pakistan’s ‘milestone’ and a preview of its upcoming May 11 elections

Could Kenya enter another period of power-sharing after its general election?

kenya parliament

Much of the attention on today’s Kenyan election has focused on the presidential race — and that’s as it should be, given that Kenya’s president wields much power, and the race is essentially even between Jubilee coalition candidate Uhuru Kenyatta and the Coalition of Reform and Democracy (CORD) alliance candidate Raila Odinga.kenya

But Kenya is also holding parliamentary and local elections for the first time after adopting its new 2010 constitution, which changes much about the way that Kenya is governed, and those elections are as historic as the presidential election is frenzied.

The heart of the new electoral system is the country’s organization into 47 sub-national counties, which have been given new powers for local governance.  Indeed, today’s election will select not only new national legislators, but also a governor and county assemblies.

The electoral reforms make Kenya’s presidency less powerful, but to the benefit of the counties, not to the benefit of the parliament.

Nonetheless, the new constitution also expands the national parliament and changes the way legislators are elected, based again on the newly delineated 47 counties.

The National Assembly — what used to be Kenya’s unicameral parliament — is now just the lower house of a bicameral parliament, which will also include an upper house, the Senate, after today’s election.

The novelty of the 2010 constitutional reforms makes it even trickier to forecast what the result will be, and the nature of Kenyan politics doesn’t make it any easier.  Given that Kenyan politics is largely based on ethnic identity, the Jubilee and CORD camps are patchwork alliances of various ethnic groups throughout Kenya.  Although the alliances are technically comprised of parties, many of those parties are also ethnicity-based or even just transitory vehicles that exist to boost the career of one particular politician.

Accordingly, Kenya lacks political parties rooted on the traditional left/right ideological spectrum, unless you count the Kenya African National Union (KANU), the governing party in Kenya until 2002 — because it was the dominant party in a one-party state for much of the 1960s, through the 1990s, its predominant ideology was perpetuating its hold on power.

That means since 2002, Kenyan politics has been dominated by temporary alliances instead of enduring political parties — the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) emerged to support the candidacy of Mwai Kibaki in 2002, and it likewise won a large majority of seats in the National Assembly.

In the aftermath of the 2007 election — widely believed to have been marred by fraud — Kibaki controversially held onto power in the presidential race, though Odinga’s Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) essentially won the parliamentary elections.  Accordingly, in early 2008, Kibaki and Odinga agreed to a power-sharing truce whereby Kibaki remained as president and Odinga would become prime minister, making Kenya one of the rare countries in Africa to feature divided government.

One of the fascinating questions this time around, given the closeness of the presidential race, is whether Kenya could see another term of split government — and what that would mean for Kenya’s governance.

If Kenyatta wins the presidency and Odinga ultimately becomes prime minister because his allies control Kenya’s parliament, it will mirror the positions each candidate’s father held exactly 50 years ago in the aftermath of independence — Jomo Kenyatta was Kenya’s first president and Jaramogi Oginga Odinga was Kenya’s first vice president.  The conserve scenario — an Odinga presidency and a Kenyatta-controlled parliament — would be perhaps an even more ironic result. Continue reading Could Kenya enter another period of power-sharing after its general election?

Despite Hayrikyan shooting, Sargsyan remains lock for Armenian election

serzhdmitri

Armenia’s looming February 18 presidential election made headlines a weekend ago when one of its candidate, Paruyr Hayrikyan (Պարոյր Հայրիկեան), was shot.armenia flag

Despite the assassination attempt, however, the election will go on as scheduled, and Hayrikyan has withdrawn a court application to delay the election by two weeks, despite an unsuccessful attempt to obtain the united backing of all opposition candidates behind his campaign.

With or without the delay, however, the election’s result was never incredibly in doubt — Serzh Sargsyan (Սերժ Սարգսյան) is the overwhelming favorite to be reelected as Armenia’s president, in a country with uncertain democratic norms and with several economic and geopolitical problems facing it in the years ahead, including complex relations with the United States, Europe, Russia, Turkey and its neighbors in the South Caucasus.

Despite the fact that Armenian media has focused intensely on the Hayrikyan assassination attempt in the past two weeks, the latest polls shows that Sargsyan (pictured above with Russian prime minister and former Russian president Dmitri Medvedev) will easily win the contest with nearly 68% of Armenians supporting his candidacy, with just 24% supporting Raffi Hovannisian (Րաֆֆի Հովհաննիսյան), with only 5% supporting Hayrikyan and none of the other five candidates winning more than 2% of the vote.

Though elections in Armenia have the trappings of democracy, and they are, in fact, freer and fairer than the show elections of, say, Belarus, they are often rigged in favor of the governing party — and since the collapse of the Soviet Union, that’s meant first the administration of president Levon Ter-Petrosyan from 1991 to 1998, his successor Robert Kocharyan from 1998 to 2008 and now, Kocharyan’s protége, Sargsyan since 2008. Continue reading Despite Hayrikyan shooting, Sargsyan remains lock for Armenian election

Everything you need to know about the showdown between the Pakistan People’s Party and the Supreme Court of Pakistan

So you already know that Pakistan is, well, kind of a hot mess, as far as governance is concerned.

You also know that the Muslim country of 180 million has had, since Partition from India in 1947, a helter-skleter relationship with democratic institutions, with periods of civilian rule interspersed with healthy intervals of autocratic military regimes.  You know that on many vectors, Pakistan falls short of what even its neighbors have accomplished, not just with respect to democracy, but also with respect to rule of law, corruption, terrorism, press freedom and so on.  (Think of Pakistan, perhaps, as a 21st century version of mid-20th century Argentina, or any other South American country where democracy didn’t quite take, despite strong party identification.)

You know that Pakistan is a traditional U.S. ally and a key strategic relationship in the ongoing U.S. efforts in Afghanistan (and along the Af-Pak border), but that Pakistan’s political and military establishment rarely speaks with one voice and that Pakistan’s government more often hinders than helps the U.S. government in its ongoing anti-terror efforts.

But what of the latest political crisis there?  The prime minister has been dismissed by the Supreme Court? And the new prime minister may be dismissed as well? All because of some corruption charges against the president? But isn’t basically every public official in Pakistan corrupt?

It’s understandable that a crisis like this could leave your head spinning in a run-of-the-mill democracy, but in a place like Pakistan, with so many extrapolitical considerations, it’s nearly incomprehensible.

Without further ado, Suffragio presents a quick primer on what’s happened so far in the showdown, and what we might expect in the near future. Continue reading Everything you need to know about the showdown between the Pakistan People’s Party and the Supreme Court of Pakistan