LONDON: Millions of voters in England and Wales will cast their ballots on Thursday in an array of local elections that will be the last big test before a U.K. general election that all indicators show will see the Conservative Party ousted from power after 14 years.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak will hope he can point to successes, notably in a couple of key mayoral races, to douse talk that the Conservative Party will change leader again before the United Kingdom's main election, which could take place as soon as next month.
On the other hand, Labour Party leader Keir Starmer will hope Thursday's local elections confirm what opinion polls have shown for two years — that Labour is on course for power for the first time since 2010.
“The national context going into these local elections is very good for Labour and very bad for the Conservatives,” said Rob Ford, professor of politics at the University of Manchester.
As is often the case in British local elections, the run-up is about expectation management, so any outperformance can be painted as a success.
That's certainly the case with the Conservatives, who are widely predicted to lose around half of the 1,000 seats they are contesting. They have pointed out, for example, that the equivalent elections were held in 2021 when the government of then Prime Minister Boris Johnson was riding high following the rollout of the coronavirus vaccines.
Thursday's elections are important in themselves — voters decide who will run many aspects of their daily lives, such as bin collections, the state of the roads and local crime prevention measures, for the coming years.
But with a general election looming, they will be viewed through a national prism.
Here are five things to know:
What's happening?
Voters in England and Wales will go to the polls for local, mayoral, and police and crime commissioner elections.
The voting is the final test of public opinion before the general election, which has to take place by January 2025 but which Sunak, who has the power to decide on the date, has indicated will be in the second half of 2024.
As well as a number of mayoral votes, including in London where Sadiq Khan is expected to win a third term, there are more than 100 elections to local councils and nearly 40 for local police and crime commissioners.
There's also a special parliamentary election in Blackpool South, a long-time Labour seat that went Conservative in the last election in 2019, when Johnson won a big victory. The results will be announced in coming days. London's mayoral result isn't due until Saturday.
No elections are taking place in Scotland or Northern Ireland, the other constituent nations of the U.K.
What's at stake for Sunak?
Potentially his job. Sunak replaced Liz Truss, who quit after 45 days following a budget of unfunded tax cuts that roiled financial markets and sent borrowing costs for homeowners surging.
Sunak, who warned about the economic implications of Truss' plan, was supposed to be a steady hand after taking the top job in October 2022. If opinion polls are right, he's not improved the Conservatives' ratings, which had even prior to Truss, been battered by the circus surrounding Johnson, who was ousted over a series of ethics scandals.
With the Conservatives seemingly headed for one of their biggest-ever electoral defeats, there's mounting speculation Sunak may face a leadership battle if Thursday's elections are really bad.
Key to his survival could be the mayoral elections in the West Midlands and Tees Valley in the northeast of England. Should Conservative mayors Andy Street and Ben Houchen hold on, he may win some respite from restive lawmakers in his party. Should both lose, he may face trouble.
Is Labour headed for power?
In historical terms, Labour has a mountain to climb if it's going to form the next government.
It's performance in 2019 was its worst since 1935. Starmer has tried to bring the party back to the center of British politics after the five-year leadership of veteran left-winger Jeremy Corbyn.
Starmer's cautious approach has clearly worked if opinion polls are anything to go by. But it's fair to say that enthusiasm levels are far lower than those that heralded the arrival of Tony Blair ahead of the 1997 general election.
That may be partly due to the more challenging economic backdrop, but Starmer, formerly a human rights lawyer, lacks the razzmatazz of his predecessor. Even so, Starmer will hope Labour notches up big wins in areas it lost under Corbyn, in the north of England and in the Midlands.
One point of concern is how many traditionally Labour supporters in Muslim communities fail to vote in protest at the party's stance over the conflict in Gaza.
Are voters being tactical?
One of the contributing factors to Blair's landslide victory in 1997 came from so-called tactical voting, whereby some voters put aside their preferred political party and back whoever they think is most likely to defeat the Conservative candidate.
Tactical voting has reemerged in recent years and could become key in the general election. It usually involves voters sympathetic to Labour in parts of the country, such as southwest England, backing the much-smaller Liberal Democrats and Liberal Democrat supporters loaning votes to Labour in the Midlands and the north of England.
Conservative lawmakers across the U.K., even in supposedly safe seats, will be hugely concerned if voters think more tactically.
Pincer from the right?
The Conservatives don't just face a challenge from the left. Reform UK is trying to outflank it from the right.
Though it is standing in a few seats, Conservatives will worry that support for the party will see Labour and others come through the middle.
Reform UK, which claims to be tougher on issues such as immigration and on Brexit, has said it won't stand aside to give incumbent Conservative lawmakers an easier chance at the general election, as its former incarnation, The Brexit Party, did in 2019. The Blackpool South special election will be particularly interesting on that front.
What is at stake in UK local voting ahead of a looming general election
https://arab.news/zncp4
What is at stake in UK local voting ahead of a looming general election
Trump is looking forward to Azerbaijan and Armenia signing a peace treaty, US diplomat says
- Armenia and Azerbaijan said last month that they had agreed the text of a peace agreement to end almost four decades of conflict
- Fighting over Karabakh, which is part of mostly Muslim Azerbaijan but had until 2023 a heavily Armenian Christian population, broke out in the late 1980s
Speaking at an energy event in Baku, Jacobs said the peace treaty would usher in “a new era of security and prosperity” for the South Caucasus region.
Armenia and Azerbaijan said last month that they had agreed the text of a peace agreement to end almost four decades of conflict between the two countries over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Fighting over Karabakh, which is part of mostly Muslim Azerbaijan but had until 2023 a heavily Armenian Christian population, broke out in the late 1980s, when both countries were part of the collapsing Soviet Union.
The territory gained de facto independence from Azerbaijan with Armenian support through a series of wars, but was ultimately retaken by Azerbaijan in September 2023, in a military offensive that prompted almost all of its 100,000 ethnic Armenians to flee.
Since then, the two countries have both said they want a peace deal, but talks have been fitful and progress slow until a sudden breakthrough last month.
The peace deal is still not expected to be signed quickly though as Azerbaijan is demanding that Armenia first change its constitution to remove what Baku says are references to Karabakh independence.
Since the draft deal was agreed, both Armenia and Azerbaijan have also accused each other of firing on positions along the two countries’ closed and heavily militarized border. No casualties have been reported in the incidents.
EU leaders hold their first summit with Central Asian states
- The EU strategy on Central Asia emphasizes Central Asia’s growing strategic importance and aims to foster a stronger partnership
The leaders of the European Union and five Central Asian countries held their first summit on Friday to discuss ways to boost trade and other ties.
The summit in Samarkand, Uzbekistan is attended by European Council President António Costa, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and the leaders of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.
Costa declared that “the European Union is eager to build a mutually beneficial partnership with Central Asia, one that goes beyond expectations.”
Von der Leyen said that the summit is set to “deepen trade ties and expand cooperation in transport, critical raw materials, digital connectivity, water and energy.”
The EU strategy on Central Asia emphasizes Central Asia’s growing strategic importance and aims to foster a stronger partnership with the countries of the region.
Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev noted that during the past seven years trade between Central Asian and EU countries has increased to 54 billion euros ($60 billion), adding that the summit “should become the starting point of a new stage in the development of multi-faceted relations.”
Danish leader tells the US ‘you cannot annex another country’ as she visits Greenland
- Danish leader: ‘If we let ourselves be divided as allies, then we do our foes a favor. And I will do everything that I can to prevent that from happening’
- ‘This is about the world order that we have built together across the Atlantic over generations: you cannot annex another country, not even with an argument about international security’
NUUK, Greenland: Denmark’s prime minister is wrapping up a three-day visit to Greenland on Friday after telling the US “you cannot annex another country,” even with the argument that international security is at stake.
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen traveled to the strategically critical Arctic island as US President Donald Trump seeks control of Greenland. He argues that Greenland, a semiautonomous territory belonging to the Kingdom of Denmark, is critical to US security.
A week ago, Vice President JD Vance visited a remote US military base in Greenland and accused Denmark of underinvesting in the territory.
Frederiksen pushed back against the US criticism as she spoke on Thursday alongside Greenland’s incoming and outgoing leaders. She argued that Denmark, a NATO ally, has been a reliable friend.
Speaking in English, she said that “if we let ourselves be divided as allies, then we do our foes a favor. And I will do everything that I can to prevent that from happening.”
“When you ask our businesses to invest in the US, they do. When you ask us to spend more on our defense, we do; and when you ask of us to strengthen security in the Arctic, we are on the same page,” she said.
“But when you demand to take over a part of the Kingdom of Denmark’s territory, when we are met by pressure and by threats from our closest ally, what are we to believe in about the country that we have admired for so many years?”
“This is about the world order that we have built together across the Atlantic over generations: you cannot annex another country, not even with an argument about international security,” Frederiksen said.
The Danish leader said that, if the US wants to strengthen security in the Arctic, “let us do so together.”
Political parties in Greenland, which has been leaning toward eventual independence from Denmark for years, last week agreed to form a broad-based new coalition government in the face of Trump’s designs on the territory. Those have angered many in Greenland and Denmark.
In an interview with Newsmax on Thursday, Vance repeated the accusation that Denmark has “really underinvested in the infrastructure and security of Greenland.”
He said Trump’s point is that “this matters to our security, this matters to our missile defense, and we’re going to protect America’s interests come hell or high water.”
Russia accused by Britain and France of delaying ceasefire talks, say Putin 'owes' the US an answer
- Britain and France are helping to lead a multinational effort known as the “coalition of the willing” to set up a force to police any future peace in Ukraine
BRUSSELS: Britain and France on Friday accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of dragging his feet in ceasefire talks to bring a halt to fighting in Ukraine and ramped up pressure on Moscow by insisting that he owes the United States an immediate answer.
Russia has effectively rejected a US proposal for a full and immediate 30-day halt in the fighting after a Kremlin official said on Monday that Moscow views efforts to end its three-year war with Ukraine as “a drawn-out process.”
“Our judgment is that Putin continues to obfuscate, continues to drag his feet,” British Foreign Secretary David Lammy told reporters at NATO headquarters, standing alongside his French counterpart Jean-Noel Barrot in a symbolic show of unity.
Britain and France are helping to lead a multinational effort known as the “coalition of the willing” to set up a force to police any future peace in Ukraine.
Lammy said that while Putin should be accepting a ceasefire, “he continues to bombard Ukraine. It’s civilian population. It’s energy supplies. We see you, Vladimir Putin. We know what you are doing.”
Barrot said that Ukraine had accepted ceasefire terms three weeks ago, and that Russia now “owes an answer to the United States.” US President Donald Trump has expressed frustration with Putin and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky after he promised last year to bring the war to a swift conclusion.
“Russia has been flip-flopping, continuing its strikes on energy infrastructure, continuing its war crimes,” Barrot said. “It has to be ‘yes.’ It has to be ‘no.’ It has to be a quick answer.”
He said that Russia shows no intention of halting its military campaign, noting that Putin on Monday ordered a call-up intended to draft 160,000 conscripts for a one-year tour of compulsory military service.
The two foreign ministers pledged to continue helping to build up Ukraine’s armed forces – the country’s best security guarantee since the US took any prospect of NATO membership off the table.
Coalition army chiefs were due to meet in Kyiv on Friday. Defense ministers from the group will meet at NATO headquarters next Thursday.
South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol removed from office over declaration of martial law
- The unanimous verdict capped a dramatic fall for Yoon, a former star prosecutor who went from political novice to president in 2022, just a year after he entered politics
- In a televised verdict, the court’s acting chief said the bench upheld Yoon’s impeachment because his martial law decree seriously violated the constitution and other laws
SEOUL: South Korea’s Constitutional Court removed impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol from office on Friday, ending his tumultuous presidency and setting up an election to find a new leader, four months after he threw South Korean politics into turmoil with an ill-fated declaration of martial law.
The unanimous verdict capped a dramatic fall for Yoon, a former star prosecutor who went from political novice to president in 2022, just a year after he entered politics.
In a nationally televised verdict, the court’s acting chief Moon Hyung-bae said the eight-member bench upheld Yoon’s impeachment because his martial law decree seriously violated the constitution and other laws.
“The defendant not only declared martial law, but also violated the constitution and laws by mobilizing military and police forces to obstruct the exercise of legislative authority,” Moon said, “Ultimately, the declaration of martial law in this case violated the substantive requirements for emergency martial law.”
“Given the grave negative impact on constitutional order and the significant ripple effects of the defendant’s violations, we find that the benefits of upholding the constitution by removing the defendant from office far outweigh the national losses from the removal of a president,” the justice concluded.
PROTESTERS ERUPT IN JUBILATION AND SORROW
At an anti-Yoon rally near the old royal palace that dominates downtown Seoul, people erupted into tears and danced when the verdict was announced. Two women wept as they hugged and an old man near them leapt to his feet and screamed with joy.
The crowd later began marching through Seoul streets. Some people were dressed in cute blue bear costumes, a protest mascot that uses the opposition’s colors.
Outside Yoon’s official residence, thousands of supporters cried and screamed when they saw the news of the verdict on a giant TV screen. They waved South Korean and US flags and chanted slogans.
“We will absolutely not be shaken!” a protest leader shouted on stage. “Anyone who accepts this ruling and prepares for an early presidential election is our enemy.”
No major violence was immediately reported.
KOREA FACES AN ELECTION WITH DEEP DIVISIONS
An election will be held within two months to replace Yoon, but a festering national divide over Yoon’s impeachment will likely continue and could complicate South Korea’s efforts to deal with President Donald Trump’s “America First” policies and North Korea’s expanding ties with Russia, observers say.
Yoon said in a statement issued via his defense team that he feels great regret for failing to live up public expectations.
He added that he will pray for the country and its people. “It has been a great honor to be able to work for the Republic of Korea,” Yoon said.
Yoon’s ruling People Power Party said it would accept the decision, but one of Yoon’s lawyers, Yoon Kap-keun, called the ruling “completely incomprehensible” and a “pure political decision.”
Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, the country’s acting leader, vowed in a televised speech to ensure “there are no gaps in national security and diplomacy” and maintain public safety and order. Han was appointed prime minister, the country’s No.2 official, by Yoon.
“Respecting the will of our sovereign people, I will do my utmost to manage the next presidential election in accordance with the constitution and the law, ensuring a smooth transition to the next administration,” Han said.
Surveys show Lee Jae-myung, leader of the main liberal opposition Democratic Party, is the early favorite to win the by-election to choose Yoon’s successor. Lee is facing trials for corruption and other charges.
Lee welcomed the ruling and credited the South Korean people for “protecting our democratic republic.”
“The courage of the people who stood in the face of guns, swords and tanks, along with the bravery of troops who refused to obey unjust orders, has led to this great revolution of light,” Lee said.
CRISIS STARTED WITH A NIGHT OF CHAOS FOUR MONTHS AGO
Martial law lasted only six hours, but left behind a political crisis, rattling financial markets and unsettling the country’s diplomatic partners. In January, Yoon was separately arrested and indicted by prosecutors on alleged rebellion in connection with his decree, a charge that carries the death penalty or a life sentence if convicted.
Under Yoon’s decree, the first of its kind in more than 40 years, hundreds of soldiers were dispatched to the assembly, election offices and other sites. Special operations soldiers smashed windows at the National Assembly and scuffled with citizens gathered to protest, shocking South Koreans and evoking traumatic memories of military rule.
Enough lawmakers, including some from the ruling party, managed to enter the assembly to vote down his decree unanimously.
No major violence occurred during the brief period of martial law, but some senior military and police officers sent to the assembly have testified that Yoon ordered them to drag out lawmakers to block a vote on his decree or to detain his political rivals. Yoon says the troops were deployed to the assembly simply to maintain order.
Yoon, 64, a conservative, was impeached by the liberal opposition-controlled National Assembly on Dec. 14. The assembly accused him of violating the constitution and other laws by suppressing assembly activities, attempting to detain politicians, and undermining peace across the country.
In his final testimony at the Constitutional Court hearing, Yoon said his decree was a desperate attempt to draw public support of his fight against the “wickedness” of the Democratic Party, which had obstructed his agenda, impeached top officials and slashed the government’s budget bill. He earlier called the National Assembly “a den of criminals” and “anti-state forces.”
YOON STILL FACES CRIMINAL CHARGES
Some experts say Yoon may have imposed military rule to head off a possible independent investigation into scandals involving his wife, Kim Keon Hee.
Without presidential immunity, Yoon could face other criminal charges, such as abuse of power. He’s the first South Korean president to be arrested or indicted while in office.
Yoon served as prosecutor-general under his predecessor, liberal President Moon Jae-in, before joining the now-ruling party in 2021 following disputes with Moon allies. A public image as strong-minded and uncompromising helped him defeat Lee in the close-fought 2022 presidential election. But after becoming president, Yoon has faced criticism that he refused to replace officials implicated in scandals and vetoed many bills passed by the assembly.
On foreign policy, Yoon pushed hard to bolster South Korea’s military alliance with the United States and overcome long-running disputes with Japan over historical traumas. He said that a greater Seoul-Washington-Tokyo security partnership is essential to coping with North Korea’s growing nuclear threats. Critics of Yoon accused him of unnecessarily provoking North Korea and neglecting relations with China, South Korea’s biggest trading partner.
