Mediaboss Marketing

CARACAS, Venezuela Opponents of Venezuelan President Nicols Maduro on Monday pledged to defy the government with escalating protest tactics, a day after showing their strength in an unofficial referendum that they said drew more than 7million votes condemning his rule.

Leaders of the Democratic Unity coalition say they will bring the country to a halt with a 24-hour general strike Thursday, urging workers to stay home and businesses to shut their doors to protest Maduros controversial plan to overhaul Venezuelas constitution.

They also invited Venezuelans who remain loyal to Hugo Chvez but dislike Maduro, his hand-picked successor, to join them in a unified front to stop the government from moving forward with a July 30 vote to elect delegates for a constituent assembly empowered to rewrite the 1999 constitution. Critics see the maneuver as a naked power grab that would amount to a death sentence for democratic rule.

This is the zero hour, opposition lawmaker Freddy Guevara said Monday, characterizing upcoming protest measures as a last-ditch effort to save the country from full-blown dictatorship.

The U.S. government intensified the pressure on the Maduro government on Monday, with President Trump vowing in a statement to take strong and swift economic actions if the July 30 vote took place. He called Maduro a bad leader who dreams of becoming a dictator and praised Sundays referendum.

Maduro opponents likened the Sunday vote to an act of mass protest. Of the nearly 7.6million Venezuelans said to have participated in the balloting organized by opposition leaders, not election authorities more than 98percent voted to reject the governments plan to draw up a new constitution, opposition leaders said. The vote also urged Venezuelas armed forces to uphold the existing constitution and support early elections.

Buoyed by those results, Guevara said, opposition lawmakers this week will also name new supreme court justices in a repudiation of the current court, which Maduro has stacked with loyalists. The move seems likely to deepen the standoff between Maduro and the opposition- controlled parliament, with the two sides on a path to developing competing legal systems.

[Stripped of their powers, Venezuelan lawmakers accuse Maduro of a coup]

On Monday, Socialist Party officials who back Maduro dismissed the 7.6 million vote tally as wildly inflated, claiming that opposition supporters voted multiple times and that the organizers of the referendum did not bother to actually count the ballots. They did not offer any proof to substantiate their claims.

But Flix Seijas Rodrguez, director of the independent Delphos polling agency, said he was amazed by the results of the referendum, given that it was organized in only three weeks and faced significant challenges. The Maduro government blasted the exercise as illegitimate and hurled threats at organizers while attempting to enforce a news blackout.

Anti-Maduro voters also faced the threat of violence. In one Caracas neighborhood, gunmen opened fire outside a polling station, killing one and injuring four.

On July 30, the Maduro government will ask Venezuelans to elect representatives for the constituent assembly. Government opponents see Maduros effort to rewrite the constitution as potentially a fatal blow to what remains of Venezuelan democracy, particularly if the assembly allows the unpopular Maduro to remain in office beyond 2019, when his term is set to expire.

[Things are so bad in Venezuela that people are rationing toothpaste]

At least 92 people have been killed in more than three months of unrest and near-daily clashes between security forces and protesters. Opposition leaders said Monday that Venezuelas democracy had reached a tipping point, requiring an intensification of street demonstrations and defections from within the government.

We interpret [the results] as a message from the people telling us to keep doing what we have been doing, plus much more, said Juan Andrs Meja, an opposition legislator who organized the referendum. We will respond to that call accordingly.

Some opposition supporters said they were disappointed that the referendum fell short of the 11million votes they were hoping for. The final reported tally of 7.6million votes was also lower than the 7.7million who voted for the opposition in 2015 parliamentary elections.

But analysts pointed out that the referendum was only symbolic, lacking the logistical support and infrastructure of an official election. Only about 15,000 polling stations were set up for the referendum, compared with more than twice as many during ordinary elections.

This wasnt a presidential election, said John Magdaleno, a political consultant and the director of the Polity polling firm. Its just an unofficial consultation.

Activists and analysts compared the turnout with the numbers of votes Chvez obtained when he held similar referendums.

Chvez never got more than 6.5million people to vote in his favor in the referendums, analysts noted, and when Venezuelas economy was humming and he was reelected president in 2012, he obtained just over 8million votes.

He died of cancer in 2013, and Maduro, his Socialist Party successor, has fared poorly in his shadow.

[Government supporters attack Venezuelan congress, injure opposition lawmakers]

Despite the latest demonstration of opposition to his plans, few believe that Maduro is willing to change course. Dismissing the referendum results as inconsequential, he called on his opponents to sit down to start a new round of dialogue with his government.

Maduros opponents are boycotting the July 30 vote, and in recent surveys, 85percent of Venezuelans say they reject changes to the constitution.

People will be disappointed if they expect the government to react directly to the results [of the referendum] or change anything, said Luis Vicente Len, a political analyst and the director of the Datanalisis polling agency, adding that the large turnout was important nonetheless.

More than 7million people participated actively in an act of civil disobedience and ignored the governments allegations that it was an illegal one, he said.

Read more:

Venezuela may be sliding into a civil war

How a new kind of protest movement has risen in Venezuela

Stuck in a death spiral, Venezuela is borrowing money at any cost

Venezuelas paradox: People are hungry, but farmers cant feed them

Venezuelans are storming supermarkets as food supplies dwindle

Todays coverage from Post correspondents around the world

Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news

Read the original:
After protest vote, Maduro's foes warn of 'zero hour' for Venezuela's democracy - Washington Post

Joseph Pennington Published 6:01 p.m. ET July 17, 2017 | Updated 6:05 p.m. ET July 17, 2017

Iraqi federal police member in Old City of Mosul on July 9, 2017.(Photo: Ahmad al-Rubaye, AFP/Getty Images)

The Iraqi victory over the Islamic State in Mosul is something that both Iraqis and Americans can celebrate. Iraqis from all sects and ethnicities fought together bravely for months to liberate the city from a truly barbaric enemy.

We have many reasons to be optimistic about Iraqs future. Just as the Iraqis are leading the way on the battlefield, they are leading the effort to stabilize their liberated communities. An Iraqi-led, United Nations-supported stabilization program has enabled nearly two million internally displaced Iraqis to return home, including nearly one million in Anbar Province.

We have seen this in Tikrit, Ramadi, Fallujah and, most recently, East Mosul. Communities are coming back to life. Mosul University students are now pitching in to clear debris so classes can start in the fall. In East Mosul, 350,000 children have returned to school.

OUR VIEW

Winning the peace in Mosul

Prime Minister Haider Abadis steady leadership and empowerment of local officials has been a key reason for Iraqs success against ISIS. By giving provincial and local leaders the authority and resources to rebuild communities, he has built trust across communal lines and set the stage for long-term stability.

There are still battles left to fight in ISIS-controlled Tal Afar, Hawijah and al-Qaim. With time and continued U.S. support, we are confident that Iraqis will liberate these areas.

Optimism about Iraqs future shouldnt blind us to the considerable challenges it faces. The country needs to heal and overcome sectarian divisions. Iraqs economy, after years of war and low oil prices, needs reform. Corruption discourages private sector initiative. ISIS will persist as a terrorist threat long after it no longer controls territory.

But these problems can be addressed now that the ISIS caliphate has been defeated. Iraq boasts the worlds second largest oil reserves and has shown itself to be a resilient democracy.

With the continued support of the United States and international community, Iraq is positioned to emerge in the post-ISIS era stronger and more unified than ever before.

Joseph Pennington is the State Departments deputy assistant secretary for Iraq.

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2uBQuLf

Read the original post:
Iraq's democracy shows resiliency - USA TODAY

Democracy is not a spectator sport! Citizens can not sit back we must pay attention to what is happening. Social media is not the place to get reporting that has been checked for facts. Social media is filled with biased opinions, misinformation and gossip. There are a lot of legitimate news outlets to chose from.

The Journal Times is one place to start. Local news and events are covered, also state and nation. In the Tuesday, July 11, The Journal Times (5A), there is a quote from a woman who moved to Racine about a year ago. She has already grasped the progress Racine is making toward revitalizing the city. Whereas another person didnt even know our mayors name. There is a price for tuning everything out! When people arent paying attention, bad things slip through. Get involved with a group working to make Racine and our nation better.

More:
Trobaugh: Participate in democracy - Journal Times

The process of democratic restoration in Pakistan will continue to face roadblocks unless civilian forces join hands.

Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif isin a serious situation after the Joint Investigation Team (JIT)found that the ruling family has been living beyond its means and has failed to provide a legitimate trail of its investments abroad. The JIT is investigating corruption allegations involving the Sharif familys role in money laundering and tax evasion, which were disclosed in the Panama Papers last year.

The findings of the JIT are not just damning for the ruling party, but also for the countrys democracy. It has become evident that the report, which appears to be politically motivated, is going to pit the countrys various civil institutions against each other. The ruling party that previously welcomed the Supreme Courts verdict of asking for a further probe has now completely rejected the JITs report by terming it biased, politically motivated, and formulated to serve the agenda of Pakistans enemies. Meanwhile, the opposition, which seldom reconciles on any national or strategic issue, has come together to ask for Sharifs resignation.

The ruling party is vowing not to follow any verdict that asks for Sharifs resignation on the one hand, while, on the other hand, it appears to have veiled itself behind issues of a strategic nature, saying that the entire case of investigation is aimed at obstructing Pakistans economic rise. The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), on a number of occasions, has said that the investigation is not just a conspiracy against Pakistans democracy, but also an attempt to derail the China-Pakistan Economic Corridors(CPEC) implementation in the country.

In Pakistan, criminal investigations, trials, and talks of accountability only take place when primarily two issues are at stake. First, these take place when a political party in Pakistan comes to power with a deep political mandate and threatens to cut down the powers of other institutions, particularly the military establishment. Second, these occur when the countrys smaller political and religious parties see their political role diminishing and therefore willingly offer themselves for partnership with the military elite, provided their objectives regarding the ruling party align.

If the downsizing doesnt work and threats still loom, the next step either results in the military taking over or setting up opportunist political elements, which would otherwise stand no chance of coming to power through constitutional means. From dismissing the elected civilian government in the early years after partition to the death sentence of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and eventual military interventions during the early and late-1990s, Pakistans democracy generally and civilian governments specifically continue to find themselves playing a very limited role in national strategic issues.

Pakistan remains a politically underdeveloped country. While there is no denying that the countrys political elite, directly or indirectly, is a by-product of the policies the military elite favored as an institution, in general, civilian institutions are not allowed to grow out of the phase where they have to concur with the military. More precisely, political parties are expected to play the role of assisting the military establishment in managing mundane national bureaucratic affairs while the latter keeps control of major strategic security and economic issues that extend beyond the countrys borders.

In the present case, Sharifs colossal political mandate was seen as nothing less than a threat to the security establishment. Sharifs early intentions to change Pakistans regional security policy after winning elections in 2013 were not welcomed by the military elite. In the following years, Sharif has been downsized to a role where his immediate and perhaps medium-term strategic concerns deal with ensuring his own survival and that of his political party.

This is not to say that the corruption-related investigation against Sharif is a hoax. However, the issue of impartial accountability becomes problematic when more than 400 other citizens whose names also appeared in the Panama Papers are let off the hook. In fact, some of them are leading the charge against the ruling family while refusing to themselves submit to similar accountability. On Sunday, Pakistan militarys media cell in a statement said that the corruption-related investigation against the Sharif family was a sub-judice matter and the Supreme Court will make its decision in the case. While the military has distanced itself from the case, the mere statement is being seen as presenting support to the countrys highest court in case it decides to remove Prime Minister Sharif.

What is more disappointing is that the continuous and wild political bickering among Pakistans political parties and allegations of rampant corruption have led to widespread public disenchantment with politicians, which creates space for non-civilian forces and their policy choices. Unless Pakistans civilians unite behind democratic norms, irrespective of their policy choices, ideological orientations, and political agendas, democracy in Pakistan will remain under threat.

Read the rest here:
Is Pakistan's Democracy Back to Square One? - The Diplomat

In the days since that speech, rapidly moving events in Warsaw have proved him wrong: As I write this, Poland is proving that the greatest threat to the West is not radical Islam. The greatest threat is not even external: It is internal. In Poland, a democratically elected but illiberal government has, in the past few days, escalated its attack on its own constitution, pushing new laws openly designed to create a politicized judiciary. And it feels emboldened to do so by the visit of the U.S. president.

The Polish government is led by Law and Justice, a nationalist ruling party with a slim parliamentary majority but no popular majority and no mandate to change the constitution. Nevertheless, since taking power, it has methodically subjugated a series of previously independent institutions: the public broadcaster, the prosecutor's office and, most seriously, the Constitutional Tribunal. It has politicized the civil service. Its conspiratorial defense minister has eliminated much of the professional military leadership, too.

Last week, only days after Trump's visit, it also passed a bill that will politicize the National Council of the Judiciary, the constitutional body that selects judges. Then it went further: Without public hearings, it introduced another bill that, if signed into law, would enable the justice minister, in breach of the constitution, to dismiss immediately all of the members of Poland's highest court.

As in the past, the European Union will object. It's conceivable that European institutions might even impose sanctions on Poland. Having been a pillar of European unity in the past so much so that a former Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, is now president of the European Council Poland has become a source of real frustration and anger across the continent. If the West were united in this view, that might have some impact in Poland. But Trump's visit to Warsaw sent the opposite message. The United States' message has encouraged Law and Justice to isolate itself in Europe, safe in its belief that America has its back.

We can all imagine the future consequences of a supine, pro-government judiciary. It could enable the government to falsify elections, to evade corruption investigations, to prosecute opponents. And this will matter: For a quarter-century, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent triumph of Central European democracy were together perceived around the world as one of the great achievements of the West. For the past decade, Polish advice on democratic transition was sought around the world, too, from Burma to Tunisia to Ukraine. A Polish pivot away from democracy will undermine not only the unity of the West, but the broader appeal and the attraction of the West in those countries, too, allowing other "oppressive ideologies" from the "South or the East" to take its place.

When Trump was elected president, many people, myself included, wrote of the impact he might have on international democracy. Many worried that he would encourage populist, nationalist or illiberal parties in Europe and elsewhere. And now he has.

Follow this link:
Anne Applebaum: Trump encourages Poland's moves away from democracy - Salt Lake Tribune