Wednesday, September 23, 2020

Lukashenko holds snap inauguration, Belarus opposition calls for Canadian sanctions


MARK MACKINNONSENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT

WARSAW  SEPTEMBER 23, 2020

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko takes his oath of office during his inauguration ceremony at the Palace of the Independence in Minsk, Belarus, Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2020.
ANDREI STASEVICH/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko inaugurated himself for a sixth term in office on Wednesday, in a surprise ceremony held amid weeks of mass protests by those who believe Mr. Lukashenko lost an Aug. 9 presidential election.

The inauguration, which was carried out shortly after soldiers formed a protective ring around the presidential compound in Minsk, was immediately denounced as a farce by opposition leaders, who again called on Mr. Lukashenko to leave power.

Fresh protests were expected in Minsk and other Belarusian cities on Wednesday. There have been demonstrations every day since the Aug. 9 vote. Despite Mr. Lukashenko’s claim to have won more than 80 per cent of the vote, most Belarusians believe the election was won by opposition candidate Svetlana Tikhanovskaya.

Mr. Lukashenko’s defiant move will increase pressure on Western policy makers to formulate a more coherent response to events in Belarus. Several prominent members of the opposition told The Globe and Mail that Canada should impose tough new sanctions targeting Mr. Lukashenko and his inner circle.

Pavel Latushko, a former cabinet minister who joined the opposition, said the inauguration ceremony – which the official Belta news service says was attended by “several hundred people” – “looked more like a meeting of thieves.” He called on foreign governments not to ignore it.


“As of today, [Mr. Lukashenko] is no longer the president of the Republic of Belarus. He is just the head of OMON [the riot police],” Mr. Latushko said in Warsaw, the Polish capital where he fled last month after being threatened with arrest for opposing the regime he was once part of. “For us, citizens of Belarus, for the world community, he is now nobody.”

Mr. Latushko praised Canada’s call, along with 16 other members of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, for the creation of a mission of experts that would investigate the alleged election fraud, as well as the regime’s use of violence against protesters. But he said in an interview that Ottawa should do more.

“We are waiting for a very strong and very honest position of Canada towards the process in Belarus,” said Mr. Latushko, who is a member of a seven-person Co-ordination Council appointed by Ms. Tikhanovskaya to oversee what the opposition hopes will be a peaceful transfer of power.

One step Canada could take, Mr. Latushko said, would be to declare that after Nov. 5 – the last day of Mr. Lukashenko’s current five-year term in office – it will no longer recognize him as president.

The opposition has also called for Canada and other Western governments to adopt economic sanctions and travel bans targeting Mr. Lukashenko and his inner circle.

The European Union has drawn up a list of 40 individuals accused of involvement in the election fraud and subsequent crackdown. However, a veto by Cyprus – an EU member with close economic ties to Russia – makes it likely EU-wide sanctions will not come to pass.

The Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia have gone ahead with their own sanctions against Mr. Lukashenko and 29 other Belarusian officials, and Poland is believed to be close to doing the same. Belarusian opposition leaders say that, with the EU’s position tangled, they’re looking to Canada, the United States and Britain move ahead with sanctions as a signal to Mr. Lukashenko that there will be consequences.

Canada imposed sanctions on Belarus in 2006 – barring all but humanitarian exports to the country – but removed the measures in 2016 as part of an effort to engage the Lukashenko regime. A press release at the time said the Liberal government believed Belarus had made “progress in key areas,” including a decrease in “the levels of violence and intimidation” used by the regime.

Andrei Sannikov, an opposition politician who ran for president against Mr. Lukashenko in 2010 – another election marred by allegations of fraud – said lowering the sanctions was a tactical error by the Trudeau government.

“It is time to recognize that it was a mistake, and for Canada to introduce unilateral sanctions,” Mr. Sannikov said in an interview in Warsaw, where he has been based since being arrested following the 2010 election. “Canada can do much more than it is doing today.”

Foreign Minister François-Philippe Champagne’s office said last week that Canada “is closely engaged with allies and members of the international community and considering all options when it comes to ensuring human rights are upheld” in Belarus. Conservative foreign affairs critic Michael Chong said Canada should reinstate the sanctions it lifted in 2016, and use the so-called Magnitsky Act to go further and target specific members of Mr. Lukashenko’s regime.

- with reporting by Michelle Carbert in Ottawa



 

President of Belarus inaugurated in unannounced ceremony, despite ongoing protests

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko takes the oath of office Wednesday.
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko takes the oath of office during his unannounced inauguration ceremony in Minsk on Wednesday.
(Andrei Stasevich / Pool Photo)
 

President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus began his sixth term of office Wednesday during an inauguration ceremony that officials did not announce in advance after weeks of mass protests against his reelection, which opposition activists maintain was rigged.

State news agency Belta reported that Lukashenko’s swearing-in ceremony took place in the capital of Minsk with several hundred top government officials, lawmakers, representatives of media organizations and other prominent figures present.

Lukashenko, 66, took an oath in Belarusian with his right hand on the country’s Constitution. The head of the country’s central election commission handed him the official ID card of the president of Belarus.

“The day of assuming the post of the president is the day of our victory, convincing and fateful,” Lukashenko said at the ceremony. “We were not just electing the president of the country — we were defending our values, our peaceful life, sovereignty and independence.”

Opponents in Belarus, including the second-place finisher in the presidential election, and representatives of European governments said the absence of public involvement in the inauguration only proved that the authoritarian Lukashenko lacked a valid mandate.

“Even after this ceremony today, Mr. Lukashenko cannot claim democratic legitimization, which would be the condition to recognize him as the legitimate president of Belarus,” Steffen Seibert, German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s spokesman, said. He called the secrecy “very telling.”

Lukashenko has run Belarus, an ex-Soviet nation of 9.5 million people, with an iron fist for 26 years. Official results of the Aug. 9 election had him winning 80% of the vote. His strongest opponent, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, got 10%.

Tsikhanouskaya, who is in exile in neighboring Lithuania after being forced to leave Belarus, has not accepted the outcome of the election as valid. Neither have the thousands of Belarusians who continue to demand Lukashenko’s resignation during more than six weeks of mass protests.

Tsikhanouskaya called the inauguration an attempt by Lukashenko to “declare himself legitimate.” She said “the people haven’t handed him a new mandate.”

“I, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, am the only leader that has been elected by the Belarusian people. And our goal right now is to build the new Belarus together,” she said in a video statement from Vilnius, Lithuania’s capital.

The United States and the European Union have questioned the election and criticized the brutal police crackdown on peaceful protesters during the first few days of demonstrations.

Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius called Wednesday’s inauguration ceremony “such a farce.”

“Forged elections. Forged inauguration. The former president of Belarus does not become less former. Quite the contrary. His illegitimacy is a fact with all the consequences that this entails,” Linkevicius said on Twitter.

The time and location of the inauguration ceremony were not publicized in advance. Law enforcement officers blocked off central areas of Minsk on Wednesday morning, and public transportation services were suspended.

The Viasna human rights group said several protesters were detained near the Palace of Independence, where the ceremony took place, holding banners saying, “The king has no clothes” and “The victory [will belong to] the people.”

Alexander Klaskousky, an independent Minsk-based analyst, said the secrecy surrounding the president’s inauguration illustrated the threat the ongoing unrest poses to Lukashenko’s grip on power. “Those who officially [get] 80% of the votes don’t act like that,” Klaskousky said.

Many leaders of the opposition on the streets have been arrested or forced to leave the country. One leading activist, Pavel Latushko, compared Lukashenko’s inauguration to a “gathering of thieves.”

“For us, the citizens of Belarus, for the international community, he is a nobody. An unfortunate error of history and a disgrace of the civilized world,” Latushko said on the messaging app Telegram. “We will never agree with the falsification [of the election] and are demanding a new vote. We urge everyone to engage in indefinite civil disobedience!”

23.09.2020 15:0

Ukraine to hold urgent consultations on Lukashenko's 'secret' inauguration - Kuleba
The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry will hold urgent meetings and consultations to determine Ukraine's position regarding the inauguration and political status of Alexander Lukashenko.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said this during his visit to Zakarpattia region on Wednesday, September 23, according to an Ukrinform correspondent.

"The inauguration was secret. No foreign ambassador was invited, even the ambassador of the Russian Federation that fully supports Lukashenko. Therefore, regarding the assessment of Lukashenko's inauguration and political status, we will hold urgent meetings and consultations to decide on our position," Kuleba said.

He said that Ukraine's position on the events in Belarus is very clear.

"The elections in Belarus were not free, fair and transparent," Kuleba said.

On September 23, Lukashenko took office as President of Belarus. The inauguration was not announced in advance for the first time, which came as a surprise to journalists and Belarusian society. In addition, according to the law "On the President of the Republic of Belarus," the swearing-in ceremony must be broadcast on television and radio. However, according to Belarusian opposition media, state channels aired TV series during the inauguration.

Belarus: Alexander Lukashenko inaugurated as president 'in secret' following disputed election
By Euronews with AP • last updated: 23/09/2020 - 

Alexander Lukashenko has been sworn in as president. - 
 Copyright Pul Pervogo [Belarus Presidential Press Office telegram channel]


President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus has assumed his sixth term of office in an inauguration ceremony that wasn't announced in advance.

State news agency Belta reported that Wednesday's ceremony is taking place in the capital of Minsk, with several hundred top government officials present.

It comes after six weeks of mass protests against the official results of the August 9 presidential election that resulted in Lukashenko's reelection after 26 years in office in office. The opposition in Belarus has challenged the election as rigged.

According to the official results, Lukashenko, who has run the ex-Soviet nation of 9.5 million with an iron fist, won 80 per cent of the vote. The United States and the European Union have also criticised the violent police crackdown on post-election protests in Belarus.

According to a post on the state media's Telegram account, the inauguration ceremony took place at 10.30 am CEST at the Palace of Independence in the centre of Minsk.

"Putting his right hand on the Constitution, Alexsander Lukashenko took the oath in Belarusian," it stated. "Then he signed the act of taking the oath, after which the chairman of the Central Commission of Belarus on Elections and the Conduct of Republican Referendums, Lidiya Yermoshina, presented Alexander Lukashenko with an ID of the President of the Republic of Belarus."

Several hundred loyalists were invited to the ceremony, including senior officials, heads of state agencies, members of the House of Representatives and the Council of the Republic, according to reports.

As part of the inauguration ceremony, Lukashenko took an oath swearing to “serve the people of the Republic of Belarus, respect and protect rights and freedoms of people and citizens.”

Lukashenko's motorcade arrived at the official residence of the president at 10 am CEST, where "Lukashenka [has] officially assumed the presidency," state media reported.

In a post on Twitter, Minsk-based journalist Franak Viačorka reported that half of the city centre was closed off to avoid protests.

Protests demanding Lukashenko to resign have rocked the country daily since last month's election, with the largest rallies in Minsk attracting up to 200,000 people.

Independent media in Belarus leave homepages blank in solidarity with jailed journalists
Belarus: More than 300 arrested at anti-government women's march in Minsk
Maria Kolesnikova charged with causing harm to Belarusian national security

Lukashenko’s strongest election opponent, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, got 10 per cent of the vote according to the official results. She didn’t accept the outcome of the election as valid. Neither did many European governments and thousands of Tsikhanouskaya’s supporters.

During the first three days of the protests, demonstrators faced a brutal crackdown, with police using truncheons and rubber bullets to disperse crowds. Several protesters died.

Amid international outrage, Belarusian authorities switched to prosecuting top activists and mass detentions, avoiding large-scale violence.

Hundreds have been arrested at weekly protests in Minsk and other cities across Belarus.

Many members of the Coordination Council that was formed by the opposition to push for a transition of power have been arrested or forced to leave the country.

 CEREN SAGIR MORNING STAR

Belarusian president sworn into office amid protests against his reelection

BELARUSIAN President Alexander Lukashenko assumed his sixth term of office today during an unannounced inauguration ceremony following weeks of mass protests against his re-election.

The swearing-in ceremony took place in the capital Minsk with several hundred government officials, legislators and media representatives in attendance.

Mr Lukashenko said: “The day of assuming the post of the president is the day of our victory, convincing and fateful.

“We were not just electing the president of the country, we were defending our values, our peaceful life, sovereignty and independence.”

Opposition leaders and a number of foreign governments claimed that the absence of public involvement in the ceremony underlined that the 66-year-old lacked a valid mandate.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s spokesman Steffan Seibert said that the apparent secrecy around the event was “very telling.”

In August, Mr Lukashenko won 80 per cent of votes, but opposition activists claim that the election was rigged.

Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, who received 10 per cent of the votes and who is in exile in Lithuania, called the inauguration an attempt by Mr Lukashenko to “declare himself legitimate,” and said that “the people haven’t handed him a new mandate.”

“I, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, am the only leader that has been elected by the Belarusian people,” she said in a video statement.

“And our goal right now is to build the new Belarus together.”

Protests demanding that Mr Lukashenko step down have rocked the country daily since the election, with the largest rallies in Minsk attracting up to 200,000 of the country’s 9.5 million people.

Police have used truncheons and rubber bullets to disperse crowds. Several protesters are reported to have died, and more than 7,000 said to have been detained.

Human-rights group Viasna said that several protesters were detained near the Palace of Independence, where the ceremony took place, holding banners saying “The king has no clothes” and “The victory (will belong to) the people.”



With power within reach, this is what Montenegro's new coalition government needs to do first ǀ View

 10/09/2020 By Duško Knežević

Opinions expressed in View articles are solely those of the authors.

When a man has ruled for decades, his loss of power is always unexpected - until it happens. In Montenegro on August 30, President Milo Djukanovic – in power with his party for nearly 30 years – lost the parliamentary election. It is the first time in history that his Democratic Socialists have been defeated.

After such a lengthy rule, a transitionary process must take place. All manner of possibility now lays before the incoming new coalition government; though they must also be conscious of the risks ahead.

Part of the reason Djukanovic’s party have been able to cling to power for so long was his ability to play the West against its fear of Russian influence. Pitching himself as a Western reformer, he branded the opposition – falsely - in election after election as eastern-facing in order to enlist western nations’ support, whilst turning a blind eye to widespread and well-reported corruption and electoral fraud.

Despite the change in parliamentary arithmetic Djukanovic will, however, still hold the presidency. Now the new government will have a critical role to play in holding him to account. It must ensure the president does not use his position to manufacture immunity from questions over corruption which he now must answer.
Duško Knežević

The new, incoming coalition government has decisively moved to dispel this myth. An agreement unveiled between its three leaders on Wednesday emphatically pledges to “strengthen and enhance cooperation with NATO.” Combined with previous pronouncements on accelerating EU membership talks, they have lanced Djukanovic’s claims.

During Montenegro’s accession talks in 2017, America identified members of Montenegrin intelligence as Russian operatives. They demanded their removal. Djukanovic obliged, yet not as expected: he simply transferred them from state security to senior positions in the state police.

Getting serious about removing these influences in state institutions can be the first signal of intent to western allies. It will bring the benefits of their cooperation in reforming those institutions. But to fully dislodge the president’s hand from Montenegro’s levers of power, the coalition will need the largest possible working majority they can muster.

If the election was one thing, it was an emphatic rejection of a discredited and corrupt regime. Those already in the coalition are, wisely, already opening the door to smaller minority parties. Currently, three alliances formally constitute the grouping. This gives them 41 seats in a house of 81. More can and should be added to drive meaningful change efficiently through parliament.

Montenegro elections: Thousands take to streets as opposition claims victory

Montenegro’s future is in the EU, says prime minister-in-waiting Zdravko Krivokapic

In addition, the coalition must roll back the religious law that was ultimately Djukanovic’s downfall. Forced through parliament last December, the controversial statute set off the nation’s largest-ever public protests. Yet, after diminishing other sectors of civil society – particularly the media and NGOs – the Orthodox Church was one remaining pillar the opposition could still unite around.

So, the people did. The law provided for the reinvention of church property as state property. Yet, a united front emerged, joining the church’s followers, those who cared about freedom of religion, property rights and Montenegro’s constitution in protest against the law and the president.

The repeal of the statute will return the freedom for all to follow their own religion in peace. Then the healing between religious cleavages and ethnicities – divided through electoral strategy by Djukanovic for decades – can begin.

Thirdly, state capture and corruption must be tackled. A Commission of Inquiry should be initiated to uncover the extent of theft under Djukanovic’s administration. The country needs to close a chapter of plunder, much like the people of Malaysia are so doing through discovering the depths of the 1MDB scandal. Investigating decades of state theft, the new administration will address the root cause for a dearth of foreign direct investment: namely, the severe lack of trust by international financiers in the rule of law.

And that need for new investment is urgent: for swift action is required on jobs, the economy, and public debt.

Immediately, the new government must ensure they put in place proper protections and support measures for citizens and small businesses suffering from coronavirus measures and poor government – something Djukanovic has conspicuously failed to do, despite holding all the levers of power up until the election.

The tourism industry – which supports tens of thousands of jobs – has been hit not only by coronavirus measures but by the outgoing government’s nationalist and arbitrary goal of barring Serbian citizens from entering the country. This must be reversed, and our regional friends welcomed once more, both for the sake of good neighbourliness and the economy.

And in the medium and longer-term, the overbearing national debt must be reduced. Projects such as the Chinese-debt funded “road to nowhere” should be reviewed and – if necessary – ended, and projects more favourable to the public and the public purse should be brought into play instead.

Despite the change in parliamentary arithmetic, Djukanovic will, however, still hold the presidency. Now the new government will have a critical role to play in holding him to account. It must ensure the president does not use his position to manufacture immunity from questions over corruption which he now must answer.

An era has drawn to a close in Montenegrin political history. A monopoly of power has been punctured for good. But the balance of power between parliament, presidency and state institutions still leaves much room for manoeuvre. Djukanovic endured as long as he did because he was a canny operator. The new coalition must recognise that the real challenge is just beginning.

_Duško Knežević is President of Mediterranean University based in Podgorica, Montenegro, and is Chairman of the Atlas Group Corporation_

Montenegro election: Who are the triumphant opposition factions and what do they stand for?

By Vladimir Utjesinovic • last updated: 02/09/2020

Opposition supporters celebrate the election results outside the Serbian Orthodox Church of Christ's Resurrection in Podgorica, Montenegro. - Copyright Risto Bozovic/Associated Press

The election in Montenegro on Sunday resulted in a slender victory for the opposition, ending the near 30-year-rule of Milo Đukanović’s Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS).

Consisting of three blocs or alliances, For the Future of Montenegro, Peace is Our Nation and Black on White, the opposition won a wafer-thin majority with 50.7 per cent of the votes, or 41 out of 81 seats in the Montenegrin parliament.

What happens now that the die has been cast?

According to the country's constitution, the newly-elected parliament must sit within 15 days of the final election results being declared with the prime minister-designate, proposed by the president, in place within 30 days of the first sitting of parliament.

Whilst the election resulted in a win for the opposition, it is still unclear what the composition of the new government will look like.


Despite the unifying goal of unseating the current DPS government and assurances that they are collectively committed to staying the course on issues such as EU integration, the rule of law and the overturning the DPS government's law on religious freedom, the opposition’s disparate values and agendas may mean that forming a viable alternative government is not an easy task.
Clash of ideologies

One of the biggest challenges will be the reconciling of opposing pro-EU and pro-Serbia and Russia stances across the competing opposition alliances. The general opinion among voters tends to reflect an anxiety that ideological antagonisms will most likely be the source of any future instability within the new government.

There have also been suggestions of a national unity government, which would not include the Future of Montenegro alliance - the largest bloc in the opposition. Ultimately, the most probable outcome remains a coalition of the three main strands of the opposition.

Montenegro's ruling party could be ousted from power for first time in 30 years
Montenegro elections: Thousands take to streets as opposition claims victory
In Montenegro, a divided nation chooses between east and west

So, who are these entities and what do they stand for?
For the Future of Montenegro

Share of the vote: 32.5 per cent and 27 seats

Political position: right-wing

This 11-party alliance is dominated by mostly pro-Russian and anti-NATO parties, advocating for stronger ties with Serbia. They have coalesced around the populist “Democratic Front”, whose leaders Andrija Mandić and Milan Knežević were convicted of an attempted coup d’état in 2016, allegedly organised by members of the Russian military intelligence agency GRU.

The alliance enjoys the patronage of the Serbian Orthodox Church, which called on its followers to vote for it in the election on Sunday. In the run-up to the national poll, the Church organised and encouraged opposition rallies after the government passed a controversial law which church leaders said enabled the state to acquire its assets.

The leader of the alliance, Zdravko Krivokapić, even celebrated the announcement of the election results in the Podgorica Cathedral of the Serbian Orthodox Church, hugging the 82-year-old Metropolitan bishop of Montenegro, Amfilohije Radović.

The alliance’s grey eminence is businessman Miodrag “Daka” Davidović, a former minister in the government of the self-proclaimed Serbian Autonomous Region (SAO) of Herzegovina from 1991 to 1992, a territorial entity in Bosnia and Herzegovina founded by convicted war criminal Radovan Karadžić.

Marko Milačić, the founder and president of the populist right-wing True Montenegro party, is also on the alliance’s electoral list, having in previous years led the anti-NATO campaign by publicly burning NATO flags.
Peace is Our Nation

Share of the vote: 12.5 per cent and 10 seats

Political position: centre-right

Consisting of four political groups, the coalition's political programme is based on post-war reconciliation but they are predominantly oriented towards pro-Serbian voters. During the campaign, they did not talk much about identity issues and the foreign policy course of Montenegro.

The civic political movement is led by Aleksa Bečić’s centrist Democratic Montenegro party, which was created after a split in the Socialist People's Party, the Montenegrin branch of former Serbian president Slobodan Milošević's SPS.

Although they won eight parliamentary seats in the 2016 elections, they boycotted Montenegro’s National Assembly for four years.

Another important party of the coalition, Miodrag Lekić's DEMOS, was formed by his withdrawal from the opposition Democratic Front. Lekić was the opposition candidate in the presidential election in 2013 in which he was defeated by Filip Vujanović. Lekić was foreign minister in the Đukanović government in the early 1990s, and later, during Milosevic's rule, ambassador to FR Yugoslavia.
Black on White

Share of the vote: 5.5 per cent and 4 seats

Political position: centre-left

The liberal coalition consists of three parties and a group of independent intellectuals.

Despite its small share of the vote, this civilian-led movement will be kingmaker, deciding who will form the government in Montenegro for the next four years.

Ideologically, it differs significantly from the other two opposition blocs. Much closer to the DPS than to pro-Serbian parties, they have always stated that their only goal is to fight against the outgoing DPS government. After the elections, the movement decisively ruled out forming a post-election coalition with Đukanović's DPS.

In the election campaign, they offered an original manifesto promise - a government without politicians, composed only of experts, regardless of political, national and religious affiliation.

The leader is ethnic Albanian Dritan Abazović, one of the founders of the Civic Movement United Reform Action (URA), a socially-liberal and green political party. A former member of parliament for Pozitivna, or the Positive Montenegro party, which dropped below the electoral threshold and lost its parliamentary status after supporting Đukanović in a confidence vote in 2016, Abazović left to co-found URA five years ago. The URA was supported in this year's election by numerous intellectuals of various ideological profiles who opposed the incumbent DPS government.

The co-founder and ideologue of the group is businessman Žarko Rakčević, a former deputy prime minister of Montenegro in the second DPS-SDP coalition government from 2001 to 2003.

While the URA was at the centre of controversy during the campaign after Tatjana Bečanović, a member of the party's presidency, denied the existence of genocide in Srebrenica, the movement is openly committed to continuing on Montenegro’s path to accession as an EU member and a pro-Western foreign policy.

Montenegro's ruling party could be ousted from power for first time in 30 years

By Orlando Crowcroft & Alessio Dell'Anna with Associated Press • last updated: 31/08/2020

Montenegrin President Milo Djukanovic speaks at his DPS party headquarters in Podgorica, Montenegro, early Monday, August 31 - Copyright AP Photos

Montenegro's pro-Western Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) has secured 35% of votes in a tight and bitterly-contested parliamentary election, its worst result since the country won independence from Serbia 14 years ago.

Official results show the pro-Serbian opposition alliance on 32.5%, meaning that it could feasibly form a government if it can reach consensus with Montenegro's other two opposition parties. That would see the DPS lose control of power in the Balkan nation for the first time in 30 years

President Milo Djukanovic, who has personally led Montenegro for three decades since Yugoslavia was dismantled in the early 1990s, said Monday that the DPS would respect the election results but claimed that it was "the strongest party in Montenegro."

Meanwhile, the leader of the pro-Serbian coalition, Zdravko Krivokapic, told supporters: "The regime has fallen."
Djukanovic's ruling DPS has governed Montenegro since 1991, leading the country to independence from Serbia in 2006 and towards membership of the European Union. Djukanovic took Montenegro into the transatlantic NATO alliance in 2017, in the face of vocal opposition from pro-Serb forces.

But it was a local issue that dominated the election this year. A row over the property rights of the Serbian Orthodox Church has pitted the pro-Western government against an alliance of pro-Serb and pro-Russian forces, led by the Democratic Front party.


In 2016, police uncovered a plot to stage a coup on election day, installing a pro-Russia and pro-Serb government in its place.

Unholy row exposes deep divisions in Montenegro
In Montenegro, a divided nation chooses between east and west
Montenegro is heading the same way as Belarus. Not enough is being done to avoid disaster ǀ View

Prior to the vote, analysts told Euronews that the election in Montenegro was a "litmus test" for the wider Balkans, while data showed that the nation of 620,000 was more divided than ever on key issues such as membership of the European Union.

Sinisa Vukovic, a senior lecturer at the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at Johns Hopkins University, said that the row over ownership of church property - and the election more generally - was about two competing visions for what Montenegro is, and where it is going.

"These are cleavages that have existed for decades, if not centuries, and now they are entrenched. Now it is a matter of: 'You are either with us or against us' - compromise may actually not be on the cards,” he said.

But while the opposition could now feasibly put together a governing coalition, it would bring together parties of divergent political views with little in common than opposition to the DPS generally, and to Djukanovic personally. It would only secure 41 out of the parliaments 81 seats.
Voting day

Indicating high interest in the election, more than half of eligible voters had cast their ballots by midday. Lines formed outside some polling stations on a very hot summer day.

Opinion polls ahead of the election predicted the DPS ahead of other groups, though not with enough margin to form a government on its own.

Many other smaller parties - including those run by ethnic minorities - are also in the race, which is being held amid a new outbreak of coronavirus.

Prime Minister Dusko Markovic said the state would deal with any attempts to affect this election.

“This is the day when Montenegro decides to move strongly forward toward economic and general development — a Montenegro that is a member of the European Union and a reliable member of NATO," he added.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

In Montenegro, a divided nation chooses between east and west

Unholy row exposes deep divisions in Montenegro

Montenegro’s future is in the EU, says prime minister-in-waiting Zdravko Krivokapic




UK
This is how German-style wage subsidies work - as chancellor considers options ahead of furlough scheme ending

By Sarah Wilson
Wednesday, 23rd September 2020, 
Sources say that the new scheme may be similar to one operating in Germany. (Photo: Shutterstock)

Chancellor Rishi Sunak is reportedly considering wage subsidies to replace the furlough scheme, which winds down at the end of October.

The Guardian reports that "German-style" wage subsidies may be on the cards as part of emergency measures to help businesses through a second wave of coronavirus.

According to sources from business and industry, the Treasury decided to delay an announcement timed for today (September 23) which would have extended the availability of state-backed loans for struggling companies after Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced a set of new restrictions in the fight against the virus last night.

Mr Sunak is said to be using the time to put together a wider package of support to avoid mass job losses and economic damage.

Business groups say the chancellor may combine the original loan extension plan with a variety of other measures to widen the net of support.

What is the German scheme?

One of the options believed to be under consideration is a scheme similar to one already in operation in Germany - the Kurzarbeit (short work) system.

The system would involve the government paying the wages of workers for short-time working.

Companies would pay their staff for the time they are at work, while the Treasury would cover part of workers' wages for time when they don't have any work.

An industry source told The Guardian that the Treasury favoured a plan whereby workers would have to undertake training or education while away from work as a quid-pro-quo for companies continuing to receive state support.

Since March, companies in Britain have borrowed more than £57bn from the government.

Three of the loan programmes, however, were due to close to applications at the end of this month, with the "bounce back" scheme due to expire at the start of November

Business groups say a move to introduce a wider package of support will underscore the UK government's commitment to supporting the economy over the next few months.

Political pressure to support business and protect jobs

No final decisions have yet been taken by the chancellor, but sources have said that discussions have been taking place between business leaders and the Treasury over the past few days.

Boris Johnson also implied that further support may be on the way, telling MPs on Tuesday (September 22) that he recognised there were further demands for economic support

“I know that my right honourable friend the chancellor will be applying, as I say, his imagination and his creativity to helping those sectors in the months ahead.

“But the best thing for them is to get back to life as close to normal as possible by getting this virus down and that is the point of the package of measures that we are announcing today.”

One source told The Guardian that the Treasury was racing to announce fresh support before a deadline next week when businesses are likely to begin cutting jobs as the end of furlough approaches.

IS SOCIAL MEDIA FUELLING THE SPREAD OF CLIMATE CHANGE MISINFORMATION?

People looking at their phones. - Copyright Unsplash
By Rosie Frostlast updated: 23/09/2020 - 13:


“The climate is changing, but there are solutions. See what the experts are saying and learn how you can help.”

If you’ve logged in to Facebook in the last week, you might have seen this statement pop up on your news feed. It is part of the social media platform’s newly launched Climate Science Information Centre. Clicking the post takes you to a series of facts, articles and “everyday actions” related to the climate crisis.

Intended to “connect people to factual and up-to-date climate information”, Facebook’s new hub comes following widespread concern from scientists and politicians about the rampant spread of misinformation on the platform.

A link to this new page will appear when people search for climate-related topics and when they view some posts. It is backed by information from leading organisations like the IPCC and UN Environment Programme. The company also says that it is working with independent fact-checking organisations to identify posts that contain fake news and then label them appropriately.

Once a post is determined to be false, Facbook says its distribution is reduced and warning labels will show when it is seen or shared. Accounts that repeatedly share misinformation will have their posts shown to fewer people.

Facebook's Climate Science Information CentreFacebook

But for a coalition of environmental groups, the changes are too little too late. “Facebook admits climate misinformation on its platforms is a rampant problem, but it is only taking half measures to stop it,” says a joint statement from groups including Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club.

“This new policy is a small step forward but does not address the larger climate disinformation crisis hiding in plain sight.“

Critics pointed out that the introduction of these new measures does nothing to address a “climate loophole” on the platform which labels climate denial content as “opinion” and makes it exempt from fact checking.

The company says that it is trying to strike a balance between allowing free speech and tackling misinformation. It doesn't want to punish people for saying something which may not be factually correct — especially if it is unintentional.

But just days after the announcement, hundreds of accounts linked to Indigenous, environmental and social justice organisations were suspended. It happened after they co-hosted an online event last May protesting a natural gas pipeline that will cut through sovereign Wet’suwet’en land in British Columbia.

Even if Facebook can eventually get the balance right for environmental misinformation, the spread of disinformation - or the deliberate sharing of wrongful information, is likely still on the rise.
HOW DOES MISINFORMATION SPREAD ON SOCIAL MEDIA?

The release of Netflix docudrama, The Social Dilemma last week has left a lot of people spinning. Our addiction to social media has long been recognised as bad for our mental health.

The revelation that the algorithms which deliver us endless streams of content are likely manipulating us to change the way we think and behave, however, was eye-opening for many.

It is these same algorithms that are being exploited to help a relatively small group of people to have a massive influence. Recent research commissioned by a coalition of environmental organisations found that a definable group of people were responsible for spreading a majority of fake or partially true stories.

The research tracked climate denial conversations through hashtags on Twitter. They discovered that this group of climate deniers was posting on average four times as much as climate scientists, experts and campaigners.

This high volume of posts helps the stories to get picked up by people with large followings and widespread influence, such as politicians and bloggers. Very vocal groups can cause a post to go viral and receive a lot of attention without always having to go through the fact-checking necessary to appear in more conventional media.

If stories get shared enough, they can even begin appearing in mainstream news. Virality is essential to the way that social media companies make money and some experts have argued that this means fighting misinformation is not in their financial interest.
WHAT IS AN ECHO CHAMBER?

The spread could be in part due to the ‘echo chambers’ which can form on social media.

"Echo chambers on social media are groups of like-minded users that friend/follow each other and share news and opinions that tend to be similar," explains Hywel Williams, Professor in Data Science at the University of Exeter.

Although he doesn't know of any studies that show conclusively that they help misinformation to spread, he believes it is likely that they might.

They form, Williams says, because people are more likely to follow or friend others that are similar to them. "When this happens in online networks, where there is a high level of choice in who to follow and what content to engage with, the aggregate effect is clusters of like-minded people," or echo chambers.

We don't get to specify to the same extent in our real-world social interactions because we don't get to choose who we live next door to, our families or who we work with. This means we are usually exposed to a diverse set of perspectives.

"But online there is endless choice and we can be highly specific in who/what we engage with, so can screen out anything we don't like or disagree with," Williams says.

"Because many users are unaware that they sit in an echo chamber, it appears to them that 'everyone' shares a similar view to their own."
Professor Hywel Williams
University of Exeter

A lack of diverse views means that "agreeable" information might not be given the same scrutiny or critical examination. "A group where everyone thinks similarly is less likely to call out a view that is a small distortion or amplification of their existing viewpoint, or may be more willing to accept false information that fits into their world view."

"Because many users are unaware that they sit in an echo chamber, it appears to them that 'everyone' shares a similar view to their own," adds Williams. "Their views get reinforced and potentially more extreme; at the same time, alternative views are less visible and seem unsupported."

It is important to note, however, that this means they may help to decrease the spread of some misformation as well by rejecting that which comes from the "wrong side".

Echo chambers are a problem that affects all kinds of topics but climate change is particularly susceptible. This is because the two sides of the conversation are readily split into activists and sceptics.

"In my view, the bigger danger of echo chambers is that they promote polarisation and lead to more extreme views," says Williams. "That can prevent consensus and exclude moderate views. A fractured public debate on any issue is likely to promote misinformation amongst a variety of other problems."

With more people than ever using social media as their main source of news, the way that this shapes our opinions could be having a significant impact on political processes and public debates.

How ‘clicktivism’ has changed the way we protest forever
Autonomous robot ship collects critical data on ocean and marine life
People care more about climate change than saving money, says survey

WHEN DISINFORMATION BECOMES DANGEROUS

Raging wildfires across Australia and the US in the last year have shown how misinformation can become dangerous. Rumours spread that, rather than being a result of a climate change or other environmental factors, a band of roaming far left arsonists were setting fires. In Australia, they were said to be climate change activists looking to create panic to further their own cause.

In the US, the apparent arsonists were linked to Antifa, playing into a larger conspiracy theory about the group spreading on social media in the country. As posts claiming that fires were being set by the far left political group began to spread, local fire and police agencies had to issue statements as people reporting suspicious activity overwhelmed services.

Facebook eventually deleted a post propagating the unsubstantiated rumour that had been shared more than 71000 times. Taking a look at the replies to the FBI Portland’s post, it is clear that even with this clarification from official sources, the unfounded claims spread far enough that people are still repeating them.

Potential violence caused by misinformation is one problem but confusion is another.

Despite 97 per cent of climate scientists reaching a consensus that greenhouse gases generated by humans are causing global warming, taking action is often still politically contentious.

Confusion, fueled by a barrage of opposing information, leads to doubt. And this doubt perhaps benefits those who seek to lose the most from government action on climate change.
The Beatles return to UK

Sir Paul McCartney describes 'lucky' first meeting with John Lennon

Songwriter was interviewed for a new radio special to mark what would have been Lennon’s 80th birthday

Louis Chilton


Sir Paul McCartney has recalled his first meeting with late Beatles bandmate John Lennon, 40 years after his death.

The singer-songwriter made the comments while being interviewed for a new two-part documentary on BBC Radio 2.

Of their first encounter, McCartney said: “I look back on it now like a fan, how lucky was I to meet this strange teddy boy off the bus, who played music like I did and we get together and boy, we complemented each other!”

Most of The Beatles’ best-loved songs are attributed to the songwriting partnership of Lennon-McCartney, although the pair famously enjoyed a fractious working relationship towards the end of their time in the band.

“There were a few songs that weren't very good,” said McCartney of their early output. “You know, [we were] clearly young songwriters who don't know how to do it.”
From left to right: George Harrison, John Lennon and Paul McCartney, circa 1960(Getty Images)

The artist then treated listeners to an example of an unrecorded Lennon-McCartney composition called “Just Fun”.

“Eventually, we started to write slightly better songs and then enjoyed the process of learning together so much that it really took off,” he said.
Read more

The two-part documentary hosted by his Lennon’s son Sean will commemorate what would have been the “Imagine” singer’s 80th birthday on 9 October. 

John Lennon At 80 will broadcast on 3 and 4 October 2020 from 9-10pm on BBC Radio 2.