Tuk-Tuks, Three-Wheeled Outsiders, Make Themselves at Home in Lisbon

Tuk-Tuks, Three-Wheeled Outsiders, Make Themselves at Home in Lisbon

By RAPHAEL MINDEROCT. 26, 2015

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/27/world/europe/tuk-tuks-lisbon-portugal.html

LISBON — Residents of this port city of faded beauty and ornately tiled facades have welcomed a surge of tourists in recent years who have helped turn around its economic slide.

But the foreign visitors, they will tell you, have also come with their share of trade-offs. Rapid redevelopment, spurred by tax breaks granted to foreign property buyers, has driven up rents and widened disparities. Streets are more crowded, the traffic worse.

And then, there is the tuk-tuk.

In just a couple of years, about 300 of the motorized, three-wheel vehicles have swarmed Lisbon’s narrow cobblestone streets, offering tourists an alternate way of navigating this hilly city, famous, too, for its network of trams and funiculars.

While visitors have flocked to the tuk-tuk, those who live in this city of about 550,000 have begun to fume about pollution, noisier streets and a verging “quality of living problem,” according to Miguel Gaspar, a Portuguese transportation consultant.

“The growth of the tuk-tuks has been such that they’re even being sold to tourists as something typical of Lisbon, which really isn’t true,” he said. “They’re now like pigeons, just everywhere.”

While the tuk-tuk is no longer common in Europe, the three-wheel vehicle originated in Italy, designed by the same engineer who developed the Vespa motor scooter, as a cheap way to rebuild city transportation after the devastation of World War II.

Since then, they have become popular in the crowded cities of Asia and Africa, where they are prized for their compact size and high maneuverability.

In Lisbon, a city heavy with history, the tuk-tuk made rapid inroads for the same qualities, which allow them to negotiate the old city’s many tight corners and steep slopes and to park almost anywhere, which they do.

But what tourists want and residents need are not always the same thing. Last month, Lisbon’s mayor, Fernando Medina, announced restrictions on tuk-tuks, which will limit the hours in which they can operate and the places they can park.

The new rules will even put some streets out of bounds for tuk-tuks, as well as require the vehicles to run on electric engines by 2017.

Lisbon’s new restrictions also apply to other so-called tourism entertainment vehicles, including the yellow go-karts that have been another hit with visitors, but that may present even more of a nuisance.

In an interview, Mr. Medina said his goal was to “regulate but not end” the thriving tuk-tuk business.

“Running a city is about managing conflicts and finding the right balance between a good tourism service and the rights of the people who work and live in this city,” he said, “and now the tuk-tuks are changing that balance.”

Other popular European destinations are facing similar challenges. In Barcelona, Spain’s tourism hub, the new left-wing mayor imposed a freeze on new hotel projects shortly after being elected in May.

In Lisbon, as one might expect, no one is more put out by the tuk-tuk craze than the city’s taxi drivers. In June, police officers detained one such driver who got into a street brawl with a tuk-tuk driver and threatened him with a hammer.

“Tuk-tuks are terrible news and completely unfair competition,” said Rui Tavares, a taxi driver, who said he had spent 850 euros, or about $940, on his taxi driver certification.

“It’s taken effort, time and money for me to become a taxi driver while these guys can start driving people around from Day 1, without any professional qualification,” he said.

For the taxi drivers, the tuk-tuk invasion has come on top of the disruption already presented by the ride-booking service Uber, which has faced the same kinds of legal challenges here as in several other European countries. Uber is now appealing a Portuguese court ruling that sided with taxi drivers against its licensing deals.

Tuk-tuk drivers say the regulatory clampdown aimed at them is further evidence of an overpowering taxi lobby that has led the crusade against Uber.

But they also see the curbs as counterproductive, at a time when tourism has spearheaded the recovery of the Portuguese economy, which required an international bailout during the debt crisis.

“There’s now a ridiculous transport war in Lisbon,” said José Gomes, 28, who started driving a tuk-tuk after losing his job last year at a clothing store. “We’re told Portugal needs more tourism to create jobs, but then everybody wants to stop something that is clearly popular with foreigners.”

Tuk-tuks like this one in Lisbon are rarely seen elsewhere in Europe. The city’s taxi drivers are not fond of them. Credit Patricia de Melo Moreira for The New York Times

Indeed, for tourists, the tuk-tuk experience is all about enjoying the ride through a scenic city, rather than necessarily seeking the quickest and cheapest way to get from Point A to Point B.

In that regard, some tuk-tuk drivers pride themselves on playing tour guide, as well as driver. The basic tour of historic Lisbon includes a stopover at the Sé Cathedral, as well as other landmarks, like the São Jorge Castle.

“We start with a route in mind, but it’s then about building some kind of relationship and intimacy with the clients and adapting to whatever they want to do, however fast or slow,” said Miguel Cardoso, a painter who has been driving a tuk-tuk for the past three months.

“If somebody wants to spend almost the whole hour just watching the Tagus, that’s fine by me,” he said, referring to the river on whose outlet to the Atlantic Ocean the city sits.

Jörg Heinermann, who heads the Portuguese subsidiary of Mercedes-Benz, the German carmaker, argued that, even in their short time here, tuk-tuks “have become almost as symbolic of Lisbon as its trams.”

Whenever he has foreign visitors, Mr. Heinermann said, he tries to include a tuk-tuk tour in their Lisbon schedule. “It’s just great to be taken around by a Portuguese who explains his own city in his own individual way,” he said.

“Some show you the homes of writers and other famous people, others just want to drive around the smallest streets possible, while others show you where to buy your Port wine or listen to fado,” Portugal’s traditional music, he said.

Even as the transportation battle has heated up, some have decided to climb aboard the tuk-tuk bandwagon rather than fight it, like José Alves, a taxi company owner who expanded into the tuk-tuk business three months ago.

Mr. Alves, who now owns six tuk-tuks with his company Colourtrip, alongside his six taxis, described the tuk-tuk as the perfect vehicle in which to discover the city.

“A taxi takes you to a specific place, but the tuk-tuk is the right choice if you just want to wander around,” he said. “Lisbon has so many hills and narrow streets that it’s really a made-for-measure place for a tuk-tuk.”

Still, even Mr. Alves backed the idea that tuk-tuks should be subject to restrictions comparable to those that apply to Lisbon’s 3,500 taxis.

“The way this market is developing,” he said, “we could have 3,000 tuk-tuks next year, so of course rules must be set.”

Outra drogaria fechou portas no Chiado para dar lugar a turistas e a loja gourmet

 Um encerramento que acontece no mesmo dia do fecho da Drogaria Pereira Leão, na Rua da Prata, e pelos mesmos motivos: rentabilizar o imobiliário respondendo à demanda turística.

Outra drogaria fechou portas no Chiado para dar lugar a turistas e a loja gourmet

Um encerramento que acontece no mesmo dia do fecho da Drogaria Pereira Leão, na Rua da Prata, e pelos mesmos motivos: rentabilizar o imobiliário respondendo à demanda turística.

POR O CORVO • 1 ABRIL, 2016 •

Texto: Samuel Alemão / Fotografias: Luísa Ferreira

http://ocorvo.pt/2016/04/01/outra-drogaria-fechou-portas-no-chiado-para-dar-lugar-a-hostel-e-lojas-gourmet/

O desfecho era já conhecido das funcionárias, “há cerca de um ano e tal”. Mas a tristeza quase conformada de Rute Peixe, 32 anos, e de Maria José, 57, parecia ontem difícil de esconder, apesar dos sorrisos. Ambas trabalhavam na loja há praticamente uma década e, juntamente com uma outra, Maria da Luz, 51, a partir desta sexta-feira (1 de abril), já estarão no fundo de desemprego. Um encerramento que acontece no mesmo dia do fecho da Drogaria Pereira Leão, na Rua da Prata, e pelos mesmos motivos: rentabilizar o imobiliário respondendo à demanda turística.

Ao princípio da tarde, atrás do balcão da Drogaria do Loreto, no número 62 da Rua do Loreto, as duas funcionárias iam atendendo as solicitações dos clientes que aproveitavam as promoções oferecidas no último dia de actividade da loja, situada às portas do Bairro Alto. “É um dia triste para nós, claro. Demos aqui muito do nosso tempo, muita da nossa dedicação, muito amor”, desabafa ao Corvo Rute, que tem dois filhos – um de dez anos e outro de oito meses – e o marido também desempregado, há cerca de mês e meio.

Mas tais preocupações pouco diziam a quem entrava ontem na loja. “As coisas têm-se vendido bem. As pessoas querem barato, claro. Há uma promoção, entram para ver. Até nós andamos sempre atentas às promoções, como é natural”, reconhece Maria José.

O prédio vai agora ser convertido num conjunto de alojamentos para turistas, estando ainda prevista a abertura no rés-do-chão de duas lojas mais de acordo com o gosto do momento. A drogaria deverá ser ocupada por uma loja gourmet, enquanto a loja ao lado, onde até há alguns meses funcionou uma papelaria-tabacaria onde se vendia alguma da melhor imprensa internacional, deverá dar lugar a uma gelataria. As obras começarão em breve, prevendo-se a sua conclusão até ao final deste ano.

Tudo isto fará parte do Edifício Officina Real, um dos quatro empreendimentos anunciados recentemente para o centro de Lisboa pela Almaria, a marca criada pela Parimob – Investimentos Imobiliários para apostar na reabilitação urbana na capital portuguesa. A empresa, que é presidida por Ana Maria Martins Caetano, filha de Salvador Caetano, gastou 15 milhões de euros nesses projectos situados na zonas do Chiado/Corpo Santo e Santos.

No sítio da Almaria, pode ler-se que o Edifício Officina Real será constituído por 11 apartamentos nas tipologias T1 e T1+1, destinados a arrendamento de curta duração. “O edifício, que acolheu em tempos as oficinas que estanhavam as loiças da Casa Real, deve o seu nome a este passado, o qual será evidenciado em todo o projeto”, explica-se, adiantando-se ainda que, na sua nova vida, “os apartamentos estão decorados, mobiliados e equipados, integrando todas as facilidades para proporcionar uma estadia diferenciada aos seus hóspedes”.

Uma situação que tanto Rute Peixe como Maria José julgam não fazer sentido. “Qualquer dia, os turistas vêm cá e perguntam uns aos outros ‘O que é que viste em Lisboa?’ e a resposta é ‘Olha, vi lojas gourmet e hostels’”, ironiza Rute, considerando que esta estratégia de aposta massiva no turismo é pouco inteligente, até porque muitos dos turistas são clientes do comércio tradicional, como acontecia com esta drogaria, onde procuravam sobretudo produtos portugueses, como os sabonetes. “Além disso, até podiam abrir o hostel em cima, mantendo as lojas em baixo”, sugere.

Europe empowers Muslim reactionaries

FORUM

Europe empowers Muslim reactionaries

The West must find its confidence and insist newcomers fit into its core consciousness.

( …) “Two fundamental conditions need to be met for any chance of peace or security to remain in our globalized century of mass migrations. European and American societies have to regain confidence in their deepest self (not merely in their free market or political principles) and immigrants to the West need to recognize the flaws of their own cultures. The first requires that Western societies reaffirm their identity-forming traditions and insist that newcomers incorporate them as a core consciousness. The second requires newcomers to have the cultural humility to do so.”

By MELIK KAYLAN 4/1/16, 5:30 AM CET

http://www.politico.eu/article/europe-empowers-muslim-reactionaries/

As we struggle to stem the wave of Islamist horror sweeping the world, we know that the vast majority of Muslims in Western societies are not terrorists or sympathizers. We know that alienating them will only create more grievances for militants to exploit, and that an ideal democratic society is one in which people of all faiths rub shoulders in peace.

These are unexceptionable propositions, surely — self-evidently humane and aligned with Western principles. They appeal to our better nature and require that we ourselves remain decent and tolerant, unlike the Trumps and Le Pens of this world.

But does anyone truly believe that holding such a position will halt the onslaught of jihadist violence abroad and at home? Those, like Tariq Ramadan, who argue that the solution lies in the West — because the cause apparently does too — have got the problem back-to-front.

As the violence spreads across continents, what we are witnessing is a meltdown of the Islamic universe. Populations in Africa are as much in the cross-hairs as those of India, Europe, the U.S. and elsewhere. The victims may be diverse but the culprits are of one affiliation. To say that the West’s bloody missteps abroad, the slaughter of Muslims in Iraq, and decades of support for dictators in Islamic countries constitute the original sin is not entirely false — the West certainly has a lot to answer for. But blaming the West conclusively means believing in an alternate and very unlikely scenario: that Islam was going to create stable democratic states on its own.

* * *

The West introduced democracy to Islam. Political enlightenment in the Islamic world first became apparent in the Ottoman Empire during the Tanzimat (Reform) period of 1837 to 1878 under the tutelage, first, of Frenchmen and the ideals of their revolution, and later of Western powers. Minorities, including homosexuals, acquired rights during that time. At every step, reformists were thwarted by the popular will and by opportunistic populists who saw the changes, rightly, as inspired from without.

Some 150 years later, the Muslim Brotherhood won the elections in Egypt. Just recently, President Erdoğan deplored the Western response to his moves to silence the Turkish press. And just 10 years ago, Syria’s Bashar Al-Assad funneled droves of jihadis into Iraq to thwart President Bush’s forcible attempt to sow the seeds of stable democracy in the region. Neither the West’s Gulf allies nor its enemies wanted any such thing for obvious reasons: It threatened the foundations of their absolutist power structures.

President Bush’s ill-conceived, badly planned, badly executed nation-building adventure in Iraq suffered above all from criminal ignorance.

So let’s be clear. The West didn’t invent despots in the region. The tradition predates Western influence, one strongman dynasty has replaced another for centuries — and always with a great deal of popular momentum backing its strong Islamic leaders. Now, the winds of globalization blow those despotic spores everywhere.

President Bush’s ill-conceived, badly planned, badly executed nation-building adventure in Iraq suffered above all from the besetting American sin of criminal ignorance abroad — ignorance of cultural conditions and regional forces opposing liberal democracy on the ground.

Centuries of despotism can evolve toward the light but not easily, not suddenly and not without a wholesale change in ideas. Bush’s airy Rousseau-esque notions — that everywhere man is born free and will be free if you just inspire the urge — ignores the simple fact that politics is rooted in culture and history.

The Western liberal belief that, given a chance, all Muslim migrants will embrace Western political ideals makes the same Panglossian error. Why do we expect host countries to succeed in convincing them that women have a right to equal treatment, especially when liberal thinking in Europe and the U.S. urges immigrants to hold fast to their own cultures?

Citizens of Muslim countries like Turkey who have fought the reactionary currents in their societies for decades resent this delusional drift in the West. They have been lectured and criticized de haut en bas by Europe for their secular elitism. They feel abandoned.

Europe had the chance to accept Turkey into the fold when its population still espoused Kemalist pro-Western principles. It is too little too late for today’s re-Islamicized Turkey to be grudgingly allowed open visas into the EU. Some Europeans will feel their bias toward Turks confirmed. Educated Turks will look at the Le Pens and Orbáns — and feel their own prejudices vindicated. What did the EU expect, when it can’t safeguard its values at home and fails to reward supporters of those values abroad?

* * *

Molenbeek and other Islamized neighborhoods in Europe have become fortresses of separatism. And the influence of those neighborhoods is not easily contained. There’s sufficient evidence to believe that the lackadaisical approach to undigested multiculturalism backfires repeatedly. It could all end catastrophically at any moment.

This is not alarmist speech for the sake of inciting hostility between communities. This is hard-headed survival thinking at the eleventh hour. If it takes only a handful of perpetrators, a minority within a minority, to obliterate the majority a large number of lives at a time, then our calculations must change. And we must scale the political impasse that keeps us from acting decisively.

Windy rhetoric has lost all meaning after the Paris attacks, let alone after Brussels. If the West wants to retain the liberal principles that attract so many outsiders, it must vouchsafe its own existence first.

Once the West starts taking itself — and its predicament — seriously, others will too.

The tragedy of these terrorist attacks is not only the death count of innocents, or the divisions created between host and immigrant citizens. It is also the derailing of the West’s sense of direction, of its history and values. If that geography of tolerance and opportunity ceases to exist, the West will resemble any other power bloc of dubious stability or well-being. There’s a reason why migrants are not making a beeline for Russia, China or Africa. Imagine the world without the heartbeat of Western principles at its center: Immigrants would find no safe haven.

Two fundamental conditions need to be met for any chance of peace or security to remain in our globalized century of mass migrations. European and American societies have to regain confidence in their deepest self (not merely in their free market or political principles) and immigrants to the West need to recognize the flaws of their own cultures. The first requires that Western societies reaffirm their identity-forming traditions and insist that newcomers incorporate them as a core consciousness. The second requires newcomers to have the cultural humility to do so.

The West’s deepest self — its sense of rooted history and site-specific tradition, of intellectual achievement from Plato to Orwell — must re-emerge vigorously if outsiders are to have anything to which to assimilate.

Equally, followers of Trump and Le Pen cannot expect immigrant communities to emulate them if they merely embody rampant consumerism and yahoo gun-culture. Placing Christian ideals at the center of the national tradition is not the worst thing — Christian principles built the Western world — but it must be the higher, broader Christianity of cathedrals and poetry and science and Renaissance painters, not of reality shows or that brand of cheap diversity that equates dead white men from Shakespeare to Einstein with oppression and invites all newcomers to keep their culture so long as they chase money and consume as impartially as the next guy.

There is still, but only just, such a thing as becoming American or European in the deepest sense. Once the West starts taking itself — and its predicament — seriously, others will too.

Melik Kaylan is a foreign affairs columnist for Forbes.com and co-author of “The Russia-China Axis: The New Cold War” (Encounter Books, 2014).

Authors:

Melik Kaylan  

Dutch referendum on Vladimir Putin

Dutch referendum on Vladimir Putin

Russia looms large in the coming vote on EU-Ukraine agreement.

By ADDIE SCHULTE 4/1/16, 5:32 AM CET

http://www.politico.eu/article/dutch-referendum-vladimir-putin-geenpeil-ukraine-accession-russia-netherlands/

AMSTERDAM — The Netherlands holds a referendum next week on whether the EU should work more closely with Ukraine, but the campaign is just as much about Vladimir Putin.

On the surface, Dutch voters will decide if they should accept a treaty to strengthen political and economic ties with the country of 46 million. The agreement was the spark for the 2014 Ukrainian revolution that led to the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovych’s government, which had reversed course under pressure from Russia and scuppered the so-called association deal.

A Dutch vote against the agreement, while not legally binding, would be hard for the government here to ignore. It would damage months of efforts by Brussels and Kiev to tie Ukraine more tightly to the West, which Moscow had worked desperately to stop. Polls show No is in the lead.

Proponents of the referendum — two Euroskeptic organizations and GeenPeil, an organization created by the right-wing GeenStijl blog — seized on the treaty as an example of the EU flouting democracy by not consulting voters.

That they succeeded in collecting more than 400,000 signatures over the Ukraine issue was a surprise, as there are no tight links between Ukraine and the Netherlands. Even trade is limited, although the Netherlands does have an important economic relationship with Russia.

While Ukraine may be almost an afterthought to many in the Netherlands, Putin is not.

“Putin is the central theme of the campaign, and we did our best to bring that about,” said Joshua Livestro, one of the founders of the StemVoor (Vote Yes) organization. “Do you want to give Putin leeway or do you oppose him? When you talk about relations with Ukraine, it is inevitable that this question comes up sooner or later.”

The Putin problem

Supporters of the Ukraine agreement see the Russian leader as a bully who has to be taught a lesson. In their view, rejecting the accord would betray Ukrainians, boost the Kremlin and reward Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.

A digitally manipulated poster created by Yes backers and displayed in the Amsterdam subway shows a passionate kiss between populist Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who opposes the treaty, and the Russian president.

“Yes, Putin would like to see Europe fall apart. But if you ignore the verdict of voters time and again … you are to blame for the collapse, and not Putin” — GeenPeil

Opponents of the Ukraine agreement think Russia has legitimate concerns about NATO and EU encroachment into its sphere of influence. Tying the Netherlands more closely with Kiev risks alienating Russia, and potentially involves the Netherlands with Ukraine’s corrupt and ineffective government, opponents argue.

One of the referendum’s initiators argues that the vote isn’t about Putin. “It’s about the direction the EU is heading,” GeenPeil wrote. “Yes, Putin would like to see Europe fall apart. But if you ignore the verdict of voters time and again … you are to blame for the collapse, and not Putin.”

Not all opponents of the treaty agree.

“It’s true that the referendum is also about relations between the EU and Russia,” said Harry van Bommel, an MP for the Euroskeptic Socialist Party and one of the most active No campaigners. “But neither Putin nor the Ukrainian people decide what we think. We make our own analysis.”

Van Bommel said Ukraine is of utmost strategic and military importance to Russia, and Moscow sees the treaty as a threat. The agreement could entangle the EU in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, he warned. “The EU could become involved in a Ukrainian attempt to recapture the Crimea,” he said, referring to the Ukrainian peninsula that Russia annexed in 2014.

Livestro said the referendum suits Russia, which is already working to destabilize the EU by supporting Euroskeptic parties like France’s National Front.

The war in eastern Ukraine came into sharp focus for Dutch voters in 2014. Russian-backed separatists were generally blamed for shooting down Malaysian Airlines flight 17, killing 298. Nearly 200 victims on the airliner, which took off from Amsterdam, were from the Netherlands. But MH17 doesn’t enter into the debate often.

When Bert Lanting, an editor at De Volkskrant, one of the leading newspapers in the Netherlands, wrote that a vote against the treaty is a vote for the people probably responsible the killings, GeenStijl and other opponents accused him of abusing the dead to make a political statement.

Though most polls show the No side ahead, the gap is closing.

One opinion poll suggested an even split, with about 25 percent in each camp. The threshold for the referendum result to be considered valid by the government is 30 percent. Another survey in late February showed that almost half of Dutch voters were not aware of the referendum, but that was before the campaign started seriously.

For the Dutch government, currently holding the rotating EU presidency, a No vote would be an embarrassment and an unwanted problem to solve.

If there is a valid vote against the treaty, the Dutch parliament said it would accept the verdict, while the government has only said it will “reconsider” the treaty. It may ask for an opt-out, as 27 out of 28 member countries have ratified the agreement, which has also received the backing of the Dutch parliament. No one expects the referendum to scrap the treaty, which has been provisionally in force since the beginning of the year.

The political impact would be greater. For the Dutch government, currently holding the rotating EU presidency, a No vote would be an embarrassment and an unwanted problem to solve in a period of multiple crises.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said in early January that Russia would “pick the fruits of an easy victory,” if the association agreement is rejected.

“A No vote will be celebrated in the Russian media as a major triumph,” Livestro said. “It will be a PR victory, even if it doesn’t change much on the ground.”

Van Bommel said he thinks there would be similar joy in the Kremlin in the event of a narrow Yes result. He predicted that outcome would help Putin because the EU would be weakened by its association with war-torn and corrupt Ukraine.

“It’s a win-win situation for him,” van Bommel said.

Authors:

Addie Schulte  

Abortion remarks provoke biggest crisis of Donald Trump's campaign

Abortion remarks provoke biggest crisis of Donald Trump's campaign

Trump’s comments have the GOP suggesting he’s been unmasked as a conservative impostor, while Democrats say it’s evidence of his ‘war on women’

David Smith in Washington and Molly Redden in New York

Friday 1 April 2016 07.22 BST

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/31/donald-trump-abortion-remarks-biggest-campaign-crisis

Donald Trump was facing the biggest crisis of his bid for the White House on Thursday, after his comment that women should be punished for having an abortion produced a fierce backlash from both left and right.

It was an extraordinary gaffe even by the Republican frontrunner’s standards and, unusually, one he scrambled to retract almost at once. But the damage was done, leading the GOP establishment to suggest that Trump had finally been unmasked as a conservative impostor.

Democrats seized on the remarks as evidence that the brash billionaire was waging “a war on women” that could deliver a landslide to Hillary Clinton in the presidential election. A recent opinion poll found that fewer than one in four American women view Trump favourably.

Abortion was legalised in a supreme court ruling more than 40 years ago but remains one of the most biggest political and moral flashpoints in America. Trump blundered into it on Wednesday when, with little evidence of forethought, he said in a TV interview that abortion ought to be illegal and women who underwent such an illegal procedure should face “some sort of punishment”.

In that moment he could claim the possibly unique distinction of uniting anti-abortion and pro-choice groups in joint condemnation. Even Trump, who has constantly derided “political correctness”, realised he had gone too far. He hastily issued statements to clarify his position, saying only those who performed abortions would be “held legally responsible, not the woman”.

The utterances made headlines on front pages across America and dominated TV news networks. Trump was criticised as rash, undisciplined and prone to making up policy on the hoof. Clinton tweeted:

In what was described as the worst week of his campaign so far, his team swung into damage-limitation mode. Spokesperson Katrina Pierson told CNN his initial comments were a “simple misspeak” and said Trump did not support penalising women for having abortions, even if they were illegal.

“We shouldn’t make this a 24-hour headline when we have things like terrorism going on in the world,” she said.

Mike Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor and ex-candidate for the Republican nomination, said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe: “It was a terrible answer. It was a mess-up, but to say that he hasn’t thought through the abortion issue, I think that’s a stretch.

“He surely had not thought through that specific question of whether or not you should enter some type of legal consequence against the woman, and he should have thought it through.”

The underlying irony was that Trump has been criticised by conservative opponents for having held liberal positions and supporting abortion rights. In a 1999 interview he described himself as “very pro-choice”. Some analysts suggested that in Wednesday’s TV interview it was almost possible to see Trump’s mental gears shifting as he tried to “wing it” and second-guess what conservatives would want to hear.

Brian Phillips, an aide to rival candidate Ted Cruz, tweeted: “Don’t overthink it: Trump doesn’t understand the pro-life position because he’s not pro-life.”

But there is also a school of thought that throughout the campaign Trump has merely been speaking in plain language what many hard right Republicans have been extolling in coded language for years. In 2012, Representative Todd Akin of Missouri, discussing pregnancy as a result of rape, infamously said: “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down.”

Dawn Laguens, executive vice-president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, bracketed Trump with Republican rivals Cruz and John Kasich. “Donald Trump just outed the anti-abortion movement,” she said. “Let’s be clear: the GOP platform is about making abortion in this country illegal. Donald Trump said it, but Ted Cruz voted on it, on John Kasich has made it a reality for some women in Ohio.”

Cruz has voted to approve several abortion bans with no exception for rape victims, and Kasich has signed 16 abortion restrictions as governor of Ohio, including a measure to ban abortion after 20 weeks.

Trump has survived outpourings of rage before, for example over his comments on Mexicans and Muslims, with fulminations from the political and media establishment holding little sway over his largely white working-class support base. If anything, these have strengthened his anti-establishment credentials and hardened his followers’ resolve.

Yet the so-called anti-Trump forces in the Republican party and beyond believe this could be the moment that a man who defies political gravity at last falls to earth. Mallory Quigley, a spokeswoman for the anti-abortion political action committee Susan B Anthony List, said Trump’s comments were an example of why the group has concerns about electing him.

“We’ve been saying for a long time that there are stronger pro-life candidates in this race,” she said. “If Donald Trump wants to be a leader, he has to demonstrate that he understands the pro-life position.

“While we’re very glad Trump has embraced the pro-life position – he’s been very honest that he’s a convert to the cause – we need to be very clear that the movement has never advocated punishment for the woman.

“There’s always that fear” of alienating voters, Quigley added, “when you have someone out there who says they’re pro-life and they’re misrepresenting our position. The most obvious thing about his comments yesterday is that he has not thought about these issues deeply.”

The latest firestorm ignited by the former reality TV show host threatened to further erode his standing with female voters. Many are already offended by the candidate’s vulgar outbursts and attacks on the credibility of a female reporter who accuses his campaign manager of assaulting her, now the subject of a police charge.

Women made up 53% of the electorate in 2012, when they favoured Barack Obama by 11 points over Republican nominee Mitt Romney, a divide highlighted in the GOP’s post-election study. “Our inability to win their votes is losing us elections,” the report’s authors wrote. Trump seems unlikely to bridge the gap in terms of female voters against Clinton or Bernie Sanders in November.

A Washington Post/ABC poll conducted earlier this month found that three-quarters of women, nearly two-thirds of independents, 80% of young adults, 85% of Hispanics and nearly half of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents view Trump unfavourably.

“If Trump secures the Republican nomination, he would start the general election campaign as the least popular candidate to represent either party in modern times,” the Post reported.

Adding to the sense of lost momentum is the proximity of Tuesday’s Republican primary in Wisconsin, where Trump would normally be expected to do well among blue-collar voters. But the latest polling there shows Cruz in the lead, with Real Clear Politics’s rolling average giving him a three-point advantage, and one poll showing the Texas senator 10 points in front of Trump.

A loss for the real estate mogul would give the Republican establishment renewed hope of wresting the nomination away from him at the party’s national convention in July.

Kasich suggested that Trump’s abortion gaffe fitted a wider pattern that shows he is woefully short of policy knowledge and unprepared for office.

“Well, first of all, he united the pro-choice and pro-life groups, which I don’t know how he did that,” the Ohio governor told MSNBC. “But think about this: he said he would use nuclear weapons, maybe in Europe, that we would leave Nato, he would have a supreme court justice who would have to investigate Hillary’s emails, that would be one of the requirements for being a justice. Then he said we should destroy the Geneva conventions.”

Asked by host Joe Scarborough why Trump has been so successful at the polls, Kasich replied: “We know why. We all know because he’s tapped into a frustration and an anger that people have had about: ‘My job is not very good, it’s not secure, my wages are not going anywhere, and my kid’s got a college education and they’re living in my basement.’”

And some believe that, once again, this will count more among Trump’s loyal supporters, who are concerned about their own economic frustrations. George Ajjan, a Republican strategist, said: “Much to the chagrin of Republican insiders and conservative stalwarts, even the most putrid, self-serving backpedalling like Trump’s on abortion is not going to significantly dent his standing in the eyes of the frustrated Joe Bloggs, whose willingness to cast a protest vote underlies Trump’s success.

“As with his other gaffes, the Democrats will put it to good use as a motivator of their own base, but abortion is a largely overrated issue when November comes round and votes are actually cast.”

On Thursday Trump made a surprise visit to the Republican National Committee (RNC), which he has previously accused of treating him unfairly. He later wrote on Twitter that he had a “very nice meeting” with chairman Reince Preibus.

“Looking forward to bringing the party together,” he said. “And it will happen!”

Barry Bennett, an adviser to the Trump campaign, said the visit was about fundraising for the committee.

“The meeting is to help the RNC,” he told MSNBC.

Trump was also in Washington for a meeting with members of his newly established foreign policy team. His campaign said it was also setting up a office in the US capital to run its convention operations and work with the RNC and Congress.

'Not fit to lead': letter attacking Xi Jinping sparks witch hunt in Beijing

'Not fit to lead': letter attacking Xi Jinping sparks witch hunt in Beijing

An anonymous, online call for the president to quit has sparked a furious manhunt for its author, betraying paranoia at the top of the Communist party

Stuart Leavenworth in Beijing

Friday 1 April 2016 02.22 BST

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/01/not-fit-to-lead-letter-attacking-xi-jinping-sparks-panic-in-beijing

It wasn’t a very long letter - the equivalent of about 920 words in English and it appeared only briefly on a Chinese website.

But its content was potentially incendiary. It called for president Xi Jinping to resign.

Many China watchers initially dismissed it as a prank, as opposed to a sign of real dissension within the ruling Communist party.

But only a few weeks later, the mysterious letter has taken on a life of its own – largely because of the government’s outsized reaction to it.

State security agents have detained more than two dozen people thought linked to the letter’s distribution. They scrubbed the Chinese internet of all search terms related to it. They have also detained and harassed family members of exiled Chinese journalist who have commented on the letter, and even tried to get one of those commentaries retracted by a German newspaper.

Party leaders apparently see the letter as a real threat, some China experts have concluded, and so they have launched a manhunt to determine how it became an internet sensation.

“In the beginning this letter didn’t seem like much,” said Bill Bishop, author of the Sinocism newsletter, which tracks Chinese politics.

“But now, given the reaction, it has become much more important. They are going after multiple people, in China and now outside of China.”

The manhunt comes as Xi confronts challenges on multiple fronts. China’s economy is slowing and its state-owned industry are resisting Xi’s calls for reform. Within the party, many functionaries are chaffing at Xi’s anti-corruption crusade, widely seen as a way for him to consolidate power.

The letter calling for Xi’s resignation included a point-by-point critique of his leadership failures. It was also written in a style – signed by “loyal Communist party members” – that have left many wondering who authored it.

“Comrade Xi Jinping, we feel that you do not possess the capabilities to lead the party and the nation into the future, and we believe that you are no longer suitable for the post of general secretary,” the letter stated. “For the party cause, for the long-term peace and stability of the country, and for your own personal safety and that of your family, we ask you to resign from all positions …”

Willy Lam, a professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong who specialises in the party’s politics, said he did not think the letter originated from a party official. The style and word choice, he said, suggested it was written by a Chinese national abroad.

Yet Lam said the letter reflected conversations that elite Chinese are having about “the cult of personality” Xi has created for himself, and his handling of the economy and foreign affairs. The president, he said, may feel threatened that a letter reflecting those concerns was aired in China, and so now he wanted to find out who was responsible.

“It speaks to the paranoia that surrounds Xi’s leadership,” said Lam, author of a recent book on the Chinese president called Chinese politics in the era of Xi Jinping. “In the process of amassing all this power, he has made multiple enemies, more than his predecessors.

“So now you have this paradox,” added Lam. “The more power he obtains, the more paranoid he gets.”

Chinese journalist denounces Xi Jinping in resignation letter

Read more

The timing of the letter’s publication also raised eyebrows. It was circulated right before the start of China’s legislative session, a time when the party leadership likes to project an image of national unity and party solidarity.

The letter was first published online by Canyu, a US-based Chinese-language website edited by Cai Chu, a human rights activist.

As of Thursday, Canyu was offline, the apparent victim of a hacking attack, according to Cai.

The letter then briefly appeared on Wujie, a Chinese news site, on 4 March. Censors took it down the same day, but by then, it had been shared within China and was soon republished and translated outside of the country.

Advertisement

Chinese authorities moved quickly, detaining Wujie’s staff and effectively shutting down the site for original content. Authorities also detained a Chinese journalist, Jia Jia, who reportedly had warned Wujie’s editors not to republish the letter. He has since been released.

Over the last week, two exiled Chinese journalists say they have become targets of the manhunt.

Wen Yunchao, a New York blogger and rights activist, reported last Friday that Guangdong province police had detained his elderly parents and brother, and were questioning them about Wen’s ties to the Xi letter. Wen quickly denied having anything to do with the letter, other than sharing it on Twitter. On Wednesday, Wen said his family members had been released.

Chang Ping, a Chinese journalist exiled in Germany, said his family members were also detained by police – apparent retaliation for a commentary Chang had written for a German newspaper, Deutsche Welle, criticising the detention of Jia Jia. Chang, whose parents were also released this week, said that police demanded that Chang retract the commentary and have it taken down from the Deutsche Welle website, which he refused to do.

Media organisations and human rights groups have criticised China’s targeting of Wen and Chang’s family members. Some are curious why China would go to such repressive lengths over a 920-word letter.

“One can’t help but notice how the tactic is backfiring,” said William Nee, a China researcher for Amnesty International in Hong Kong. “Conducting an aggressive manhunt against anyone allegedly involved in commenting on the letter only serves to put more attention on the letter, giving it a longer shelf life.”

Bishop agrees. China’s international reputation is only being harmed by the overreach, he said.

“If there were a Golden Boot for own-goals,” he said, “China would win it every year.”

5 deadlines to watch on the EU-Turkey migration deal

5 deadlines to watch on the EU-Turkey migration deal

New threats emerge to the agreement to control migrant flows.

By JACOPO BARIGAZZI 3/29/16, 5:30 AM CET

http://www.politico.eu/article/5-deadlines-to-watch-on-the-eu-turkey-migration-deal-refugee-crisis-asylum-greece-mediterranean-syria-war/

Making the controversial EU-Turkey migration deal work was always going to be a huge logistical challenge. Now that the terror attacks in Brussels have stirred up fresh opposition, it’s a political one too.

Even before the attacks, EU leaders warned that major elements of the deal reached this month would be difficult to implement, from the mass mobilization of officials and resources needed in Greece to process arriving migrants to the ability and willingness of some countries to accept even the smallest number of asylum seekers.

Under the deal, Greek authorities detain newly arrived migrants and send them back to Turkey; in exchange, the EU agreed to resettle up to 72,000 Syrian refugees directly from Turkey and speed up financial aid to help Turkey care for the 2.7 million Syrian refugees it is hosting. Those who arrived before the deal came into force will either have to be sent back to their countries of origin, if they are illegal migrants, or have their asylum claims examined in Greece.

Already, there are signs that the deal is in trouble. Two EU officials said Turkey has been slow to enact certain terms: It has authorized no new returns of migrants under the readmission agreement with Athens and is not moving forward on providing full protection to non-Syrian refugees. Officials also said it is too early to measure how well Turkey is doing in preventing additional migrants from leaving on their way to Greece.

Here are five key issues that will determine whether the deal succeeds or fails:

1. Security concerns

After the terrorist attacks in Brussels, Poland shut its doors to refugees. “I say very clearly that I see no possibility at this time of immigrants coming to Poland,” Prime Minister Beata Szydło said Wednesday. Other countries could follow.

Diplomats fear that countries that never wanted to take part in the relocation of 160,000 refugees across Europe will use the terrorist threat as an excuse to pull out. They also say that countries could use security concerns to beef up their background checks on refugees, making the whole relocation process even slower that it is now. If any refugees are linked by investigators to the terrorist attacks it could be a further threat to the deal.

What to watch for, and when: Unless there is another terror attack, by the middle of April it should be clear if countries have grown even more reluctant to take in refugees.

Refugees and migrants on a rubber boat arrive at the Greek island of Lesbos | TR/AFP via Getty Images

Refugees and migrants on a rubber boat arrive at the Greek island of Lesbos | TR/AFP via Getty Images

2. Migrant flows

This is the major point for the EU. If migrant flows in the coming weeks continue to be high, then the deal is virtually dead.

There is a line in the joint declaration approved by EU and Turkish leaders that makes it clear: “Should the number of returns exceed the numbers provided for above, this mechanism will be discontinued.” Which means that if the number of Syrians returned to Turkey is above the 72,000 figure, the deal is breached. “It’s a way to keep pressure on the Turks to keep their borders shut,” said a diplomat.

What to watch for, and when: It will be clear by the end of April if the deal has had any impact on reducing migrant flows. Only monthly figures are reliable, officials say, and with better weather likely to make it easier for people to move, the comparison with data from spring last year will show if there had been any reduction.

Since the agreement took effect March 20, the flow of migrants has been uneven.

Last Thursday marked the first day since the crisis started that no migrants arrived in Greece, according to Greek government data, but officials say the drop was an exception mainly due to bad weather. On Friday, another 161 migrants arrived and despite warnings of forced removals, a few hundred arrivals came each day, with a peak last Monday of 1,162.

German Chancellor and Chairwoman of the German Christian Democrats (CDU) Angela Merkel speaks to supporters

3. Visa liberalization

This is the major point for the Turks. The deal says that visa liberalization for Turkish citizens traveling to the EU will take place at the latest in June, “provided that all benchmarks have been met.”

That’s easier said than done. Out of 72 benchmarks that Turkey must implement, Ankara has fulfilled 37. Of the remaining 35, 12 have not been fulfilled or only partially met, and work is progressing more smoothly on the remaining 23.

It took Ankara years to implement the first 37 benchmarks, so “we don’t think that Turkey will manage to meet all the remaining benchmarks in a few weeks,” said Alexandra Stiglmayer, senior analyst at the European Stability Initiative, a think tank. “I am sure that if Turkey does not get visa liberalization the deal is off or delayed.”

What to watch for, and when: Here there’s a hard deadline. If by the end of May, Turkey hasn’t managed to meet the benchmarks, the deal is in trouble.

4. Greece’s ‘Herculean’ task

About 4,000 people are being mobilized to handle the logistics of the deal, some 2,500 of them from EU member countries, according to an estimate from the Commission.

Tribunals will have to process asylum claims and any resulting appeals quickly. Refugee identification centers, so-called hotspots, have been turned into detention centers for those migrants who are to be returned. Greece and Turkey have to swiftly enact legislative changes to make the deal fully legal.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker wasn’t just making a Greek analogy when he described it as a “Herculean task.” The return of Syrians to Turkey and their resettlement is supposed to start April 4.

What to watch for, and when: The next few weeks will show whether Athens is managing or collapsing under the refugee burden. Small protests have already taken place in some detention centers. After April 4, it will be clear if the resettlement and return of Syrians is working.

5. Legal challenges

Many legal aspects remain to be addressed, including the issue of Greece recognizing Turkey as a safe third country, a key point for sending migrants back there. A Commission spokesman said early last week that Greece would introduce legislation soon, and in the meantime asylum requests lodged as of March 20 would not receive a decision until the new legislation is adopted.

Some humanitarian organizations suspended some of their activities on the Greek islands, complaining that registration centers were being turned into detention centers.

What to watch for, and when: If Greece does not change its laws and Turkey is still foot-dragging on granting full protection for non-Syrians, experts say, it will be another sign the deal is in trouble.

EU officials say they hope that the message that migrants will be jailed and returned would be enough to significantly discourage new arrivals by the end of April.