Connect with us


After weeks of violent protests, what is happening Peru?



Thousands of protesters in Peru have converged in the capital Lima to show support for ousted former President Pedro Castillo and to demand the resignation of current President Dina Boluarte.

The mass demonstrations on Thursday aim to keep up the pressure against the government, with protesters also calling for the dissolution of parliament and fresh elections.

Counterprotests already under way are rejecting those demands, a sign of divisions wracking the country.

Here is what to know about the unrest:


What sparked the protests?

The country has been rocked by violent unrest since Congress removed Castillo and replaced him with his vice president, Boluarte, on December  7.

Castillo, 53, had been accused in multiple corruption investigations and narrowly avoided two impeachment attempts by Peru’s opposition-led legislature. Before the third impeachment effort on December 7, Castillo tried to dissolve Congress and rule by decree. The constitutional court called Castillo’s announcement a “coup d’etat”.

The legislature immediately voted to replace him in the latest blow in a years-long clash between Peru’s executive and legislature. Boluarte then ascended to the job as Peru’s sixth president in five years.

Castillo is being held in pre-trial detention while he is investigated on charges of rebellion.

What is fuelling the current protests?

Many of the protesters are Castillo supporters with a similar background to the former president. They are Indigenous and from rural Peru’s mountainous regions, and have argued that Boluarte doesn’t represent them.

Demonstrations began in the south and spread quickly in rural areas across the country.

In the five weeks of protests, 43 people have been killed in confrontations with security forces, according to Peru’s human rights ombudsman.

Protesters say that no dialogue is possible with a government that they say has unleashed so much violence against its citizens.

”We are from Chota in Cajamarca. We have come to Lima to defend our country, considering we are under a dictatorial government … which has stained our country with blood,” Yorbin Herrera, a protester from Cajamarca, told Al Jazeera.

As well as Boluarte’s resignation, the mass demonstrations in Lima will call for the dissolution of parliament and fresh elections.

“I am upset. Angry. Traumatised and shocked by what is happening here,” Luis Garro, another anti-government protester, told Al Jazeera.

“I believe that the people are going to force Dina Boluarte and the Congress out,” he added.

The protests that have engulfed much of Peru in the past month have largely been grassroots efforts without a clear leadership.

‘There is a long history of exclusion’

Experts say the worst political violence Peru has experienced in more than two decades has shined a spotlight on the deep divisions in the country that go back for years.

“The political situation in Peru has several layers … [and] if you look a bit further down into the social order of things … this can’t just be about one specific moment in 2023, or 2022,” Alonso Gurmendi, a lecturer in international relations at the University of Oxford, told Al Jazeera.

“There is a long history of exclusion of people from Indigenous descent, and Indigenous people in Peru have been left out of the economic growth [Peru has seen], where even if GPD is growing, and the macroeconomics numbers are doing well, every day people are left alone if they cannot privatise their basic needs,” he said.

“There is no good health care; there is no public housing, [and] public education is not well funded.

“So the population feels there is a double system and all of these protests boil down to this difference, between the part of Peru that is able to take advantage of the ‘economic miracle’, and the part of Peru that isn’t, that is still left behind,” Gurmendi said.

People say goodbye to demonstrators as they depart for Lima to protest against the government of Peruvian President Dina Boluarte in the city of Ilave, Puno, in southern Peru [File: Juan Carlos Cisneros / AFP]

What is the current government saying?

President Dina Bolouarte says she’s willing to talk to the demonstrators – but that they must gather peacefully.

“We know that they want to take Lima because of everything that is coming out on social media on the 18th and 19th [of January],” Boluarte said in a speech on Tuesday.

“I call them to take Lima, yes, but in peace, calmly; I’ll wait for you at the government house to be able to talk about the social agendas that you have because you well know that the political agenda that you are proposing is not feasible,” she added.

Boluarte has said she supports a plan to move up elections for president and Congress, originally scheduled for 2026, to 2024.

A “march for peace” supporting Boluarte was also under way in Lima on Thursday, with dozens of members from community groups and political parties wearing white T-shirts in rejection of the protests.

What happens next, and can the current president stay?

Analysts say it’s difficult to predict, but they don’t foresee better times for the country.

“It’s very difficult to say [what will happen],” Juan Claudio Lechin, a political analyst in Lima, said on Al Jazeera’s Inside Story.

“[But] if [Boluarte] has the guts to stay, she can stay because she has the army and the police, and she has the backup of approximately 80 percent of the population; the difference is that this part is not mobilised, whereas the other part, is being mobilised … with very aggressive actions,” he added.

Gurmendi said politicians in power have failed to see what is driving those demanding Boluarte’s resignation.

“The political establishment in Lima is unable or unwilling to understand the root cause of the protests,” Gurmendi said. “They seem to be convinced that this is just a ‘terrorist attack’ in the country with no legitimacy.

“So, unfortunately, I don’t see this playing out in any way that is peaceful, not at least for some time,” he said. “I actually think the country requires a longer process of a national discussion about how to change the system … so that it includes everyone.”


Source link


Uyghur refugee vote by Canada MPs angers China




The Chinese government says a motion MPs passed Wednesday to provide asylum to persecuted Uyghurs amounts to political manipulation by Canada.

MPs including Prime Mister Justin Trudeau unanimously called on Ottawa to design a program that would bring 10,000 people of Turkic origin, including Uyghurs, to Canada from countries other than China.

They passed a motion that acknowledges reports that Uyghurs outside China have been sent back to their country of birth, where they have faced arrest as part of Beijing’s crackdown on Muslim groups.


Foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said in Beijing that people in the Xinjiang region live in peaceful harmony, contradicting widespread reports of forced labour and sexual violence.

An English translation by the ministry said Canada should “stop politically manipulating Xinjiang-related issues for ulterior motives,” and Ottawa is “spreading disinformation and misleading the public.”

The non-binding motion said the government should come up with the outline of a resettlement program by May 12 that would begin in 2024 and meet its target within two years.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 2, 2023.


Source link

Continue Reading


Republicans push to remove Ilhan Omar from foreign affairs panel



Washington, DC – In one of his first moves since becoming speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy is leading an effort to block Congresswoman Ilhan Omar from serving on the chamber’s Foreign Affairs Committee over her past criticism of Israel.

On Wednesday, the Republican majority in the House advanced a resolution to remove Omar from the panel. Democrats opposed the move, accusing McCarthy of bigotry for targeting the politician – a former refugee of Somali descent who is one of only two Muslim women serving in the US Congress.

A few Republicans initially opposed McCarthy’s effort, casting doubt over his ability to pass the resolution against Omar, given the GOP’s narrow majority.

But on Wednesday, all 218 House Republicans present voted to move forward with the measure, as Democrats remained united in support of Omar with 209 votes. A final vote is expected on Thursday as progressives rally around Omar.


The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) defended Omar, calling her an “esteemed and invaluable” legislator.

“You cannot remove a Member of Congress from a committee simply because you do not agree with their views. This is both ludicrous and dangerous,” CPC Chair Pramila Jayapal said in a statement on Monday.

The resolution

The resolution aimed at Omar, introduced by Ohio Republican Max Miller on Tuesday, cites numerous controversies involving the congresswoman’s criticism of Israel and US foreign policy.

“Congresswoman Omar clearly cannot be an objective decision-maker on the Foreign Affairs Committee given her biases against Israel and against the Jewish people,” Miller said in a statement.

Omar retorted by saying there was nothing “objectively true” about the resolution, adding that “if not being objective is a reason to not serve on committees, no one would be on committees”.

While the Republican resolution accuses Omar of anti-Semitism, it only invokes remarks relating to Israel, not the Jewish people.

For example, the measure calls out the congresswoman for describing Israel as an “apartheid state”, although leading human rights groups – including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch – have also accused Israel of imposing a system of apartheid on Palestinians.

Early in her congressional career in 2019, Omar faced a firestorm of criticism when she suggested that political donations from pro-Israel lobby groups – including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) – drive support for Israel in Washington.

Omar later apologised for that remark but Palestinian rights advocates say accusations of anti-Semitism against Israel’s critics aim to stifle the debate around Israeli government policies.

In the past two years, AIPAC and other pro-Israel organisations spent millions of dollars in congressional elections to defeat progressives who support Palestinian human rights, including Michigan’s Andy Levin, a left-leaning, Jewish former House member.

‘Different standards’

Although the Democratic Party is standing behind Omar now, the Republican resolution prominently features previous criticism against the congresswoman by top Democrats.

Lara Friedman, president of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, an advocacy and research group, said Republicans are trying to validate their talking points against Omar by using the statements and actions of Democrats.

“They own this,” she said of Democrats who previously attacked Omar. “They made a decision in the last few years to jump on board and score political points at Ilhan’s expense … And that decision is now the basis for the resolution that is being used to throw her off the committee.”

Friedman added that Omar and her fellow Muslim-American Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib are held to “different standards” when it comes to addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Both legislators were the subject of racist attacks by former President Donald Trump who in 2019 tweeted that they, along with other progressive congresswomen of colour, “should go back to the broken and crime-infested places from which they came”.

Omar in particular became a frequent target of Trump’s anti-refugee rhetoric in the lead-up to the 2020 elections. At one rally in 2019, Trump failed to intervene as his supporters chanted “send her back” in reference to Omar.

Friedman said attacks on Omar appeal to the Republican base and play well for the party politically.

“It’s a really handy way to embarrass and corner Democrats because when Democrats vote against this tomorrow, the Republican argument is going to be: ‘I don’t get it. You said all these things [against Omar]. Why are you not holding her accountable?’ Politically, this is just fantastic for them.”

For her part, Omar has remained defiant, calling McCarthy’s effort to remove her from the committee, against initial opposition from his own caucus, “pathetic”.

Yasmine Taeb, legislative and political director at MPower Change Action Fund, a Muslim-American advocacy group, praised Omar’s commitment to a “human rights-centered foreign policy”.

“Rep. Omar speaks truth to power – a rarity in Congress. And House Republican leadership would rather waste time by attacking a progressive Black Muslim woman and pushing a far-right agenda than working on addressing the needs of the American people,” Taeb told Al Jazeera in an email.

Omar has been a vocal proponent of human rights and diplomacy in Congress. While her comments about Israel often make headlines, she criticises other countries too – including those in the Middle East – for human rights violations.

Still, critics accuse her of perpetuating anti-Semitic tropes in her criticism of Israel and even allies have described some of her comments as “sloppy”, if not malicious.

On Thursday, Win Without War, a group that promotes diplomacy in US foreign policy, decried the Republican push against Omar as an attempt to strip the House Foreign Affairs Committee of a “progressive champion and skilled legislator who challenges the political status quo”.

“Rep. Omar has helped raise the bar for progressive foreign policy in Congress. She has steadfastly advocated for cuts to the Pentagon budget, held US allies accountable for human rights abuses, and confronted the racism and Islamophobia present in US foreign policy,” Win Without War executive director Sara Haghdoosti said in a statement.

Committee wars

Congressional committees serve as specialised microcosms of Congress. The panels advance legislation, conduct oversight and hold immense power over the legislative process.

Usually, the party in power appoints the chairs and majority members of committees, while the opposition party names its own legislators to the panels.

But back in 2021, Democrats voted to remove Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene from her assigned committees for past conspiratorial, anti-Semitic and Islamophobic comments.

That same year, the Democratic House majority also formally rebuked Paul Gosar, another far-right Republican, for sharing an animated video that depicted him killing Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Now, Greene is an outspoken proponent of removing Omar from the Foreign Affairs Committee.

“No one should be on that committee with that stance towards Israel,” Greene said earlier this week. “In my opinion, I think it’s the wrong stance for any member of Congress of the United States – having that type of attitude towards our great ally, Israel.”

After Greene was stripped of her committee assignments, McCarthy had openly promised payback against the Democrats if they became the minority in the House, an event that came to pass in the 2022 midterm elections.

“You’ll regret this. And you may regret this a lot sooner than you think,” McCarthy said at that time.

The newly elected speaker has also blocked Democrats Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell from joining the intelligence committee. Schiff was the former chair of the panel.

Meanwhile, Republican Congressman George Santos, who is facing calls to step down for lying about his heritage and professional and personal history, “temporarily recused” himself from committee assignments as he is being investigated over his campaign conduct.


Source link

Continue Reading


Former interim Conservative leader Candice Bergen steps down as MP



Member of Parliament and former interim Conservative leader Candice Bergen has resigned her seat in the House of Commons.

Bergen, 58, has represented the Manitoba riding of Portage—Lisgar since 2008. She served as interim leader of the Conservatives and leader of the Opposition from February to September 2022. Prior to that, she served as deputy leader of the Conservatives.

In a video posted to Twitter Wednesday, Bergen said she has submitted a letter of resignation, “ending an incredible and very fulfilling 14 years.”

Bergen thanked her constituents, family, volunteers, staff and political colleagues “on both sides of the aisle, regardless of your political stripe.”


Bergen announced in September of last year that she would not seek reelection. Pierre Poilievre replaced her as Conservative leader that month.

Bergen did not give a specific reason for her resignation and did not mention any future plans.

“I’m choosing to leave now not because I’m tired or I’ve run out of steam. In fact, it’s the exact opposite,” she said in the video.

“I feel hopeful and re-energized. Hopeful for our strong and united Conservative Party, and our caucus, under the courageous and principled leadership of my friend, Pierre Poilievre.”

Bergen ended her goodbye message on a hopeful note.

“With God’s grace and God’s help, I believe that the best is yet to come. Thank you so much Portage—Lisgar, and thank you Canada.”

The Toronto Star was the first to report the story.

“On behalf of the Conservative Party of Canada, thank you Candice for your leadership, your devotion to our Conservative movement and your service to the people of Portage—Lisgar, and all Canadians,” Poilievre said in a tweet Wednesday.

The news means there will be a byelection in Portage—Lisgar to replace Bergen.

Manitoba Finance Minister Cameron Friesen announced last week that he’d step down as an MLA to seek the federal Conservative nomination in the riding.

The death of MP Jim Carr late last year set up a byelection in another Manitoba riding — Winnipeg South Centre. The Alberta riding of Calgary Heritage and the Ontario riding of Oxford are also up for byelections later this year.

“I thank her for her many years of service,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said of Bergen in a media scrum Wednesday.


Source link

Continue Reading