REDRAWING THE LINES: GERMANY AND COLOMBIA

Over the past four days, Germany’s coalition government nearly collapsed because of a schism over the country’s migrant policy, and a left-wing candidate got 8 million votes in Colombia’s presidential election.​


What’s the common thread? Both stories flow from bold political gambles, framed in moral terms, that national leaders took years ago and which have fundamentally reshaped politics in their countries ever since.

In Germany, which Gabe has been watching closely as always, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s 13-year tenure is looking increasingly tenuous as she faces rebellion within her own ranks over migrant policy. Her interior minister, Horst Seehofer of the Bavaria-based CSU party (for decades the more conservative alliance partner to Merkel’s own CDU) says he wants to turn away migrants at Germany’s southern border, directly flouting Merkel’s policy of allowing them in. If the CSU breaks with Merkel, her government could collapse, potentially triggering new elections.

What changed to get us here: Merkel’s historic 2015 decision to open the country’s borders to more than a million migrants from the Middle East and North Africa. In last fall’s elections, the upstart AfD party rode a scorching anti-immigrant platform into the Bundestag, becoming the first far-right party to make it there in Germany’s postwar history and swiping a huge chunk of CSU voters along the way. So for the more conservative figures in Merkel’s coalition, it’s a no brainer: take a harder line on migrants or risk losing more ground to the AfD. The Chancellor now has two weeks to work out a new Europe-wide solution in which other countries accept more migrants. But with anti-immigrant parties running Hungary, Poland, Austria, and now Italy, that won’t be easy. Merkel’s moral stand in 2015 may yet have deep political consequences in 2018.

In Colombia, the fact that Gustavo Petro, a former mayor of Bogota and one-time guerilla, had an opportunity to lose this Sunday’s presidential runoff to center-right candidate Ivan Duque was by itself historic. Never has a left-wing figure made it so far at the national level in Colombia, a country run virtually since independence by center-right parties.

What changed to get us here: Outgoing President Juan Manuel Santos in 2016 signed a controversial peace accord that ended 50 years of war with the left-wing FARC guerrillas. Throughout that conflict, the stigma of rebel violence closed off space for a normal left-wing politics and reduced much of political debate to the question of how to deal with the FARC. Now, issues like the economy and corruption have become much more salient for most Colombians, and there was Petro, running on a socially-progressive platform that took aim at inequality and pledged to wean Colombia off of fossil fuels.

Still, Mr. Duque won on a distinctly center-right platform — in many ways influenced by his political patron, hardline former president Alvaro Uribe — that envisions a staunchly pro-business agenda alongside revisions to some of the peace deal’s more lenient aspects. And with strong turnout, he commands a robust mandate. But Mr. Petro was upbeat on election night, pledging to lead a left-wing opposition from the seat he now gets in the Senate. Whether a newly viable opposition from the left pulls Duque towards the center or pushes him more towards his base in a deeply polarized country is a new story that may reshape Colombia profoundly, and fast.

Legislators in 8 US states have recently passed laws to limit abortions, thrusting the contentious issue into the center of the country's political debate ahead of the 2020 presidential election. The bills are intended, in part, to force the US Supreme Court to revisit its landmark 1973 Roe v Wade decision, which gave women the right to choose to terminate pregnancy. Here's a look at how other countries around the world regulate abortion at the national level, as well as a region-by-region snapshot of how prevalent the practice is today, compared to 30 years ago.

Last week, as trade tensions continued to rise between China and the US, the Trump administration landed one of the heaviest blows yet on Beijing, moving to severely restrict the Chinese tech and telecoms giant Huawei's ability to do business with American firms.

What happened? Two things: The Trump administration formally banned sales of Huawei telecoms equipment in the US. More importantly, it also prohibited American firms from selling their technology to Huawei without a special license.

Why? It's complicated. Technically, Huawei was blacklisted from acquiring US technology due to alleged violations of US sanctions against Iran. But the US is also concerned that Huawei could allow Beijing to spy on or disrupt data flowing across the next-generation 5G data networks of the US or its allies. President Trump may also believe the moves will give him extra leverage in his broader fight with Beijing over trade and technology.

The fallout is already starting to hit. Here's where:

More Show less

An Austrian politician got drunk with a Russian woman in Ibiza a few years ago and said some things that have now broken up his country's government.

That's right, over the weekend the German press released a video secretly recorded on the Spanish resort island just before Austria's 2017 elections, in which Heinz-Christian Strache, the leader of the far-right Freedom Party of Austria (FPO), tells a woman posing as the niece of a Kremlin-connected Russian oligarch that if she donates money to his party, she'll get lucrative government contracts.

More Show less

Direct(ed) Democracy In Russia – After thousands of people protested the construction of a new cathedral in a nice park in Yekaterinburg, Russia's fourth largest city, President Putin weighed in to stop construction until a popular referendum can be held. What does that tell us? Well, for one thing, Putin is probably a little more sensitive to public unrest after seeing his approval rating pummeled by a botched pension reform last year. But more to the point, this is a nice illustration of how democracy works in Russia: the new tsar orders accountability to happen when and where it suits his interests.

The Size of Modi's Election Victory – Eight different exit polls released over the weekend show Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's BJP party comfortably ahead in the country's 6-week national election. Voting ended on Sunday, with final results due on Thursday. How big will the BJP's margin be? In 2014, the party won the first outright parliamentary majority in India in 30 years, but after mixed economic results and rising concerns about sectarian tensions, the BJP went into this election on shakier ground. We're watching to see if Modi heads into his second 5-year term emboldened with another majority, or if he's forced to cobble together an unwieldy coalition of parties in order to govern.

What We're Ignoring: Cash for Peace and a Southern Switcheroo

The Deal of the Millennium – President Trump has a plan to secure peace between Israel and Palestine. That plan is: buy it. The administration announced over the weekend that it will hold a "economic workshop" in Bahrain in late June to get Gulf and other Arab states to funnel aid to Palestine, in exchange for which the Palestinians are expected to drop their long-held demands for an end to Israeli settlements, the designation of East Jerusalem as their capital, and (some form of) formal statehood. We're skeptical that cold cash will solve one of the most intractable conflicts on earth. Also, it's not a great sign that the Palestinians themselves don't even plan to attend.

Don't Cry for Veep, Argentina – With her country in crisis (yet again), Cristina de Fernández Kirchner, the controversial left-wing populist who ran Argentina between 2007 and 2015, is increasingly well-positioned to return to power in elections later this year. But over the weekend she pulled a surprise move, announcing that she'd be running only as vice president, allowing former aide Alberto Fernández, whose politics are seen as somewhat more moderate than hers, to top the ticket. We get that it's an electoral strategy meant to broaden Kirchner's appeal among centrist voters, but let's be serious: if the ticket wins, only one Fernández will really be running the country – AND SPOILER: IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ALBERTO.