Former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley won her first Republican primary in Washington, D.C. She broke Donald Trump's sweep of the Republican primaries, but it is unlikely to change the trajectory of the contest. Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley won her first contest in the Republican presidential nomination race in Washington D.C. on Sunday. Her triumph in the D.C. primary breaks rival Donald Trump's sweep of the Republican presidential voting contests. In the US electoral system, voters head to the polls for either primaries or caucuses depending on the state they live, to elect a candidate for the presidential election. The presidential nominees are then declared during conventions held later in the year. The general election takes place on November 5.  Haley wins D.C. ahead of Super Tuesday The former United Nations ambassador has pledged to stay in the race at least through Super Tuesday this week, when 15 states and one US territory will vote. Trump has a commanding lead according to opinion polls in nearly all of those states. Trump won the most delegates in the eight early-voting states in January and February and is poised to rack up more delegates on Super Tuesday. To win the Republican nomination for the presidential election ballot in November, a candidate needs to secure at least 1,215 delegates. In Washington D.C., Haley won 62.9% of the vote, while Trump garnered 33.2%. Because Haley won more than half of the votes, she won all 19 delegates that were up for grabs, but is still a long way off winning the party's nomination. Republicans in Washington reject Trump "It’s not surprising that Republicans closest to Washington dysfunction are rejecting Donald Trump and all his chaos," Haley campaign spokesperson Olivia Perez-Cubas said in a statement. Haley was the first woman to win a Republican primary in US history, her campaign said. Washington is one of the most heavily Democratic jurisdictions in the nation, with only about 23,000 registered Republicans in the city. The capital's moderate set of Republicans, many of whom work in politics, are vastly different from those in other states. They believed that Washington could represent Haley's best chance to win a primary. Trump's campaign issued a statement shortly after Haley's victory sarcastically congratulating her on being named "Queen of the Swamp by the lobbyists and D.C. insiders that want to protect the failed status quo." Though Haley faces near-impossible odds in her quest to win the Republican nomination, her win will likely inoculate her from criticisms that she is not able to win a single primary. Some Republicans, however, will see her popularity in Washington as a negative. Many party leaders, including Trump, portray the city as one that is run by elites out of touch with their voters.

Former US President Donald Trump has started strongly in his bid to receive the Republican presidential nomination in 2024. His success comes despite his facing numerous criminal charges. Former US President Donald Trump on Monday won the first Republican presidential contest by an unprecedented margin, with caucusgoers in the Midwestern state of Iowa braving polar temperatures to cast their ballots. Trump's victory confirms his domination of the party, with the Iowa win showing that his supporters remain loyal despite the many legal challenges he faces,  including 91 criminal charges in connection with the 2020 election.   What were the results of the Iowa caucus? With almost all of the vote counted, Trump had 51%, easily beating out Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on 21% and former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley on 19%. Trump has thus easily surpassed Bob Dole's 1988 record margin of 12.8 percentage points for an Iowa Republican caucus victory. The state result amply backs up results from national polls that have shown Trump, 77, with a massive lead in the contest to become Republican presidential candidate. Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, who was also among the contenders for the Republican nominee, has now thrown in the towel after receiving less than 8% of the Iowa vote, endorsing Trump in a speech to his supporters after results became known.     The caucus had the lowest voter turnout in 25 years, possibly owing to the life-threatening cold and dangerous driving conditions prevailing in the state. The contest now moves to the northeastern state of New Hampshire, with the second caucus scheduled in eight days' time.   What has been the reaction to the result? "THANK YOU IOWA, I LOVE YOU ALL!!!" Trump wrote in characteristic upper case on his social media platform, Truth Social, following news of his win. In a rambling victory speech,  Trump called for national unity. "I really think this is time now for everybody, the country, to come together," he said. Democrat President Joe Biden, who would face off in a rematch against Trump in November if the latter clinches the nomination, said the result made it clear that Trump was first in line for the Republican nomination. "Looks like Donald Trump just won Iowa. He's the clear frontrunner on the other side at this point," Biden said on the messaging platform X, formerly known as Twitter. Both de Santis, 45, and Haley, 51, remained combative after their defeats in the poll.   "Because of your support, in spite of all of what they threw at us, we got our ticket punched out of Iowa," DeSantis told supporters. Haley said that, "When you look at how well we're doing in New Hampshire and in South Carolina and beyond, I can safely say tonight Iowa made this Republican primary a two-person race."   Trump's court cases Trump's win in Iowa comes a day before he is expected appear in court in New York for a civil case where he has already been found liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll. Last May, a jury found that he had sexually assaulted Carroll in the dressing room of a New York department store in 1996. Trump is also confronted by a slew of other legal challenges, including being charged with conspiring to overturn the 2020 election and facing allegations of involvement in the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by his supporters. Those allegations have led to two states — Colorado and Maine —disqualifying Trump from running for the presidency, but both states put their decisions on hold while he appeals the rulings.

Former US President Donald Trump on Sunday confirmed that he will not participate in the first televised Republican presidential primary debate which is scheduled for Wednesday. "The public knows who I am & what a successful Presidency I had," Trump posted on Truth Social, a social media platform he co-founded. "I will therefore not be doing the debates," he added as he mentioned his lead in opinion polls as evidence of his popularity among Republican voters ahead of the 2024 presidential elections. Trump's absence in the party's primary debates was already speculated. For months, he had repeatedly said he saw little value in giving a chance to his party rivals — who will gather for the first time in Milwaukee on Wednesday — to attack him given his lead in polls. What could Trump's absence from debates mean? A CBS poll on Sunday showed that Trump was the preferred candidate for 62% of the Republican voters, beating his closest rival Florida Governor Ron DeSantis received 16% support. The other Republicans in the race each had less than 10% support.   Trump's sizable lead in the polls suggest that the former real estate mogul is still popular with the base of the Republican Party despite now being indicted four times. DeSantis, former US Vice President Mike Pence and former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley are expected to take part in the debate. Trump's absence from this week's debate could allow his rivals such as DeSantis to gain ground. Other candidates at the debate, such as former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, may attack Trump relentlessly throughout the event, with the former president not able to defend himself in real time since he is not onstage.

Bangladesh’s next general election, which is widely perceived as being important due to the role it is expected to play in determining the country’s political future, is barely six months away. Incumbent Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her ruling Awami League (AL) party have battled an aggressive campaign led by the primary opposition party the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) as well as economic difficulties that the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine brought upon the country. The problems of the AL government were compounded earlier this year when the United States (US) began exerting escalating pressure on it to prove its democratic credentials even after 15 years in power. In this backdrop, the recent findings of the national survey conducted by the International Republican Institute (IRI) that while Bangladesh citizens were pessimistic about the economy and elections, policies on infrastructure and development had buoyed Sheikh Hasina’s public support and added to her popularity would have come as a pre-election shot in the arm for the AL. The IRI is an American nonprofit organization that is funded and supported by the US federal government, and the conclusions of a survey conducted by it would have been taken careful note of by Sheikh Hasina and her team. In an article titled ‘Bangladesh: Survey Reveals Premier Remains Popular Despite Growing Public Discontent’ that was posted on 9 August on the website of the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), David Hoogstra, a program manager at the IRI, and Geoffrey Macdonald observed that although political tension was rising in Bangladesh ahead of the country’s next national elections, due by January 2024, with both the ruling AL and opposition BNP holding large rallies across the country to mobilize their supporters, there was little polling data publicly available that could put in focus the state of race. For a country of 170 million people, there was remarkably little credible public opinion data in Bangladesh. Most observers’ assessment of political strength was driven by impressions of grassroots enthusiasm and crowd size at rallies, which are highly unreliable measures. That changed a little when the IRI recently released its national survey and focus group discussion (FGD) study that shed light on Bangladesh’s political, economic, and social dynamics. The authors wrote, “This research shows that though citizens are pessimistic about the state of the economy and elections, the government’s policies on infrastructure and development have buoyed the prime minister’s public support. Furthermore, while the opposition’s popularity is growing and its calls for a caretaker government are breaking through, Bangladeshis appear skeptical of its boycott strategy”. The IRI survey found that economic issues had been driving the pessimism in Bangladesh, and 51 percent of the respondents said that the economy was doing poorly. Bangladeshis are also frustrated with politics, and ordinary citizens believe that political and civic institutions are not protecting their interests. Others cited corruption, a serious issue across all of South Asia, as the single most important problem in the country. Even civil society was viewed negatively, with 62 percent saying civic groups represent the interests of elites. The article pointed out that the most contentious debate in Bangladesh’s politics currently centered on election administration. The BNP is boycotting all elections until the restoration of Bangladesh’s caretaker government (CTG) system, which installs a politically neutral government before election day. The AL — which scrapped the system after Bangladesh’s high court ruled it unconstitutional in 2011 — says the Election Commission can competently oversee fair elections. AL supporters point to the BNP’s massive Dhaka rally in December 2022 and other opposition political events held freely around the country. In 2022, non-AL candidates won in local elections, lending credibility to the process. Recent municipal elections have encountered some problems but have also been lauded for relatively high turnout, reduced violence and open competition in some locations. Furthermore, the government has consistently said it welcomes international election observers in January. In May, the AL also floated the idea of a bipartisan election time government including the BNP, and a senior AL official recently said the party is open to internationally mediated political dialogue. Nevertheless, Bangladeshis are divided on this issue. While 92 percent say they are very or somewhat likely to cast their vote, 56 percent of Bangladeshis say the opposition should compete in the election even if the CTG is not reinstated. In focus groups, many BNP supporters urged their party to run. The article concluded that “The Bangladeshi public’s pervasive pessimism appears to be boosting the opposition’s popularity but has not yet substantially weakened the Sheikh Hasina government. About 70 percent of Bangladeshis say the prime minister is doing a good job, and majorities approve of the government’s performance on various policy issues from access to drinking water to improving education”. International opinion on the issue of democracy and rule of law in Bangladesh has been divided and inconsistent. Over the past year, several senior US government officials — including Secretary of State Antony Blinken, US Ambassador to Bangladesh Peter Hass and State Department Councilor Derek Chollet — have publicly called for free and fair elections in Bangladesh. Al Jazeera reported in May this year that Antony Blinken had said that the US was adopting a new policy to restrict visas for Bangladeshis who undermined the democratic election process at home. Blinken said the US was supporting “free, fair and peaceful national elections” and would target either pro-government or opposition supporters in the deeply polarised nation. Blinken added that he was “announcing this policy to lend our support to all those seeking to advance democracy in Bangladesh”, and that the move could affect current or former officials and politicians and members of law enforcement, the judiciary and security services “believed to be responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic election process in Bangladesh”. He asserted that “The holding of free and fair elections is the responsibility of everyone – voters, political parties, the government, the security forces, civil society and the media”. Other western-aligned governments have followed the US’ lead on Bangladesh. The United Kingdom (UK), Japan and others have echoed US calls for free and fair elections, and the European Union (EU) sent a six-member Election Exploratory Mission that visited Bangladesh from July 8 to July 22 and held several dozen meetings with various stakeholders, including political parties, media representatives and civil society members, to assess the political situation in the country and to decide on the possibility of sending EU election observers to monitor the January 2024 polls. A high-level US delegation, including Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Donald Lu and Under Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights Uzra Zeya, also visited Bangladesh in July and discussed a range of issues, including “free and fair elections”, labor issues, human rights and combating human trafficking with senior Bangladeshi officials. In its response to Blinken’s comments, the Bangladesh Foreign Ministry issued a statement assuring of free and fair elections in January next year. It said, “The government apparatus will take necessary measures to prevent and address any unlawful practices or interference … to compromise the smooth and participatory conduct of the elections. The electoral process will remain under strict vigilance, including by international observers as accredited by the Election Commission”. It stressed that the Election Commission retained the ability to perform its functions in full independence, credibility and efficiency. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina reacted angrily to the new visa rule, which was widely perceived as a warning to the ruling administration, and said it amounted to an attempt to topple her government. Speaking at the Qatar Economic Forum in Doha shortly after Blinken’s statement, Sheikh Hasina assured that “I am here to ensure our people’s voting rights because people should decide who will run the country. It is people’s power. I want to ensure people’s power. I am not here to grab power, rather I want to empower our people. They should have that right to choose their government. So under our government, definitely elections will be free and fair”. Taking a dig at the US’ own imperfect experience with democracy, Hasina had added, “As for the US, you can see that Mr Trump didn’t accept the results. What do they have to say now? We have told everybody, if they want to send observers they can do it”. Some analysts believe that the US pressing Bangladesh on democracy has more to do with gaining leverage in business and trade deals and countering rival China’s growing influence in the country. Washington, they say, has done little to push for free elections in Pakistan which is mired in its own deep political crisis. They argue that under proxy military rule, mass arrests, disappearances, murders and torture have become a regular feature in Pakistan. Delwar Hossain, a professor of international relations at the University of Dhaka, was quoted by the Bangladeshi media as saying that “The US approach to Bangladesh needs to be changed. In the case of Pakistan’s political instability, the US is silent while in Bangladesh’s case they are highly active”. Among regional powers, India has consistently extended its unqualified support to the Sheikh Hasina regime. Ali Riaz, non-resident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council’s South Asia Center, noted in his article titled ‘Bangladesh election 2024: What role will India play?’ that “Under the Hasina regime, India has received Bangladesh’s support in rooting out insurgency in India’s Northeastern region, securing transit through Bangladesh, gaining permanent access to two main ports in the Bay of Bengal, signing an energy deal which ensures that Bangladesh buys electricity with the highest cost, inking an agreement which allows India to install a surveillance system in the Bay of Bengal, agreeing to a water-sharing deal which provides India control over the river Kushiyara and engaging in close defense cooperation to name but a few significant bilateral achievements”. Riaz opined that it was, therefore, not surprising that “Despite the intense discussions in the media, there hasn’t been any official word from New Delhi regarding the new United States policy or the growing tension between the United States and Bangladesh. New Delhi has remained studiously silent”. India’s support for Sheikh Hasina is on account of many factors, most significant among which is the terrorism promoted by the BNP during its period in power in Dhaka that Hasina has helped virtually eliminate. Equally weighty is the Indian desire to keep China at bay. For its part, China has sought to foster close economic and defense cooperation with Sheikh Hasina’s government, while remaining politically neutral. The US-led West, which has for several years been sensitive to India’s position on Bangladesh, also recognizes the perils of pushing Sheikh Hasina too far. As Jasmin Lorch, South Asia analyst and guest lecturer at the Humboldt University in Berlin put it while commenting upon the possibility of EU sanctions on Bangladesh, “It is also unclear whether such restrictions would be effective because they might just push Bangladesh closer to China, which is a highly authoritarian patron”. From the US perspective, adopting too tough a stance against Bangladesh at this juncture could actually run counter to its broader geopolitical interests in South Asia and the Indo-Pacific. As Geoffrey Macdonald pointed out, “Internationally, the United States, India and China will be watching closely. Bangladesh’s long border with India, strategic location on the Bay of Bengal and economic potential make it an attractive ally for Indo-Pacific competitors”, which includes China. The Awami League, meanwhile, will take solace that the desire of the US to build a close relationship with India will, to a lesser or greater extent, serve to dilute democracy-promoting pressure upon Dhaka from Washington.

A majority of 70 percent respondents think that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is doing “a good job.”  Washington-based International Republican Institute (IRI), conducted the survey. Findings from the national survey of Bangladesh, conducted between March and April 2023, are posted on the IRI website.  IRI is an American nonprofit organization funded and supported by the United States federal government. Most of its board is drawn from the Republican Party. According to a latest survey, 40 percent think that Sheikh Hasina's work is 'Very good'. 30 percent of the participants think that Sheikh Hasina's work is 'somewhat good'. 20 percent of participants rated Sheikh Hasina's performance as 'somewhat bad'. Apart from this, 10 percent of the participants think Sheikh Hasina's work is "Very bAd".  On the other hand, Some 53 per cent of the voters in Bangladesh think the country is headed in the wrong direction and 50 per cent of them believe that the price hike is the main reason behind that. 92 percent of survey respondents said they were likely to vote in the next national election. 57 percent of respondents said they would be "very likely" to vote. Those who do not want to vote cite electoral fraud and voter registration issues as the main barriers to voting.

Four days and fifteen votes have ended with Kevin McCarthy finally being elected as speaker of the House of Representatives in the US Congress. Republican leader Kevin McCarthy was elected speaker of the US House of Representatives on Friday night on a historic 15th attempt, after days of failed voting rounds. The deadlock in selecting a speaker was the longest the House had seen in more than 160 years. Major concessions to the far right McCarthy's successful vote comes after members of the far-right Freedom Caucus within the Republican Party refused to vote for him until he agreed to all of their demands for the policy agenda in the new Congress, among other issues. He managed to convince more of his colleagues to vote for him in the 12th and 13th ballots, but due to the party's ultra-slim majority in the House, a small number of lawmakers were able to frustrate his ambitions up until Friday night. But on the 15th vote, McCarthy finally won on a margin of 216-212. He was able to be elected with the votes of fewer than half the House members only because six in his own party withheld their votes — not backing McCarthy as leader, but also not voting for another person. McCarthy's election to the role comes on the two-year anniversary of the January 6 riots, which saw a mob of Trump supporters storm the Capitol building in an attempt to stop Joe Biden being sworn in as president. The election of a speaker means that the House was at last able to start swearing in newly elected lawmakers and start the 2023-24 session. The speaker of the House is a major political figure who is second in line to the presidency after the vice president. She or he is tasked with presiding over House business.  McCarthy vows 'checks' on Biden "I never thought we'd get up here," McCarthy said when he was introduced as the new speaker of the house by Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffreys. "My father always told me, it's not how you start, it's how you finish,'' McCarthy told cheering fellow Republicans. "Our system is built on checks and balances. It's time for us to be a check and provide some balance to the president's policies," McCarthy said, adding that his leadership would be committed to cutting the national debt, lowering gas prices and tackling immigration, among other issues that Republicans support. The vote almost saw physical violence break out when Republican Mike Rogers of Alabama started to charge toward party fellow Matt Gaetz, one of the main opponents to McCarthy's election.  Rogers was restrained by another Republican, Richard Hudson. Republican former holdouts vote for McCarthy Before the vote, McCarthy had flipped some 15 hard-line Republican holdouts to become supporters. Chairman of the Republican Freedom Caucus Scott Perry tweeted, "We're at a turning point," after switching his vote for McCarthy. Another hard-line Republican who switched his vote for McCarthy, Byron Donalds, said that former President Donald Trump had urged Republicans to end the dispute the day before. But the key to McCarthy's victory was the concessions he made to the hard-liner wing of the Republican party. Those concessions included sharp spending cuts and curbs on McCarthy's own leadership, which could make his job difficult. He agreed to the reinstatement of a longstanding House rule that would allow any single member to call a vote to oust him from office. Biden calls for cooperation US President Joe Biden, a Democrat, congratulated McCarthy, and called for cooperation between the leaders of the two parties. "As I said after the midterms, I am prepared to work with Republicans when I can, and voters made clear that they expect Republicans to be prepared to work with me as well," Biden said. US politics in recent times have been characterized by a strong divide between the two major parties, with Republicans seemingly swerving further and further to the right of the political spectrum.

The vote by the Democratic-majority House was a direct response to recent mass shootings in the US. The bill has little chance of progressing in the Senate because of Republican opposition. The US House of Representatives on Friday passed a bill to ban assault weapons, following a spate of recent mass shootings. The legislation was approved by 217 lawmakers, with 213 against the measure. It’s an attempt to reinstate an earlier 10-year assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. Speaker Nancy Pelosi pushed the vote toward passage in the Democratic-run House, saying the earlier ban saved lives. Almost all Republicans, however, voted against the measure, and it is unlikely to pass in the Senate, where Democrats would need 10 Republican votes even to consider it. The bill would make it unlawful to import, sell or manufacture a long list of semi-automatic weapons and it exempts those already in possession. In June, Congress passed a gun control law, with bipartisan support, but the new bill takes it much further. Ban on assault weapons contentious After the Uvalde school shooting that left 21 people, including 19 children, dead, President Joe Biden appealed to lawmakers to ban assault rifles or at least raise the minimum age for buying them from 18 to 21. Republican lawmakers, who see such a restriction as going against the constitutional right to bear arms, have refused to go along. Republican Congressman Guy Reschenthaler argued the latest bill would be both unconstitutional and ineffective, saying it’s a gun grab, pure and simple. Gun rights are protected by the Constitution’s Second Amendment, giving Americans the right to keep and bear arms. Democratic Representative Jim McGovern said the weapons ban is not about taking away Americans Second Amendment rights but ensuring that children also have the right to not get shot in school. The bill comes at a time of intensifying concerns about gun violence and shootings, including a supermarket shooting in Buffalo, the killing of school children in Uvalde, and the July Fourth shooting of revelers in the Chicago suburb of Highland Park.

Saying that the Biden Administration should resist from the actions that might drive New Delhi away from Quad, a top Republican senator supported waiving of CAATSA sanctions against India for purchasing S-400 missile systems from Russia. Senator Todd Young said, India is currently taking delivery of the Russian S-400 system. The country is also in the process of acquiring new frigate ships from Russia. "Both are important systems for the Indians," he said on Wednesday during a confirmation hearing for James O'Brien for the position of the State Department coordinator for Sanctions Policy. "India is a vital ally in our competition against China, and thus, I believe we should resist taking any actions that might drive them away from us and the Quad. I am, therefore, strongly supportive of waiving CAATSA sanctions against India, given our shared foreign policy interests," Senator Young said. He also said the hearing,"As most here know, the Indians have a lot of legacy systems from previous decades, and they are interoperable with the Russians' systems. And the Indians seek to defend their land border from Chinese incursions and defend the Indian Ocean from an increasingly adventurous and lawless blue ocean navy in the People's Liberation Army" . The Indiana senator asked O'Brien if the US experience with Turkey provided any warning or lessons on how to proceed with India. "I believe they are very different circumstances, and, of course, different security partnerships -- but how do you believe we should think about the possibility of sanctioning our friends and not just threats," he asked. In response, O'Brien said it is difficult to compare the two situations, with a NATO ally that is breaking with legacy defence procurement systems, and then with India, a partner of growing importance, but that has legacy relationships with Russia. O'Brien also added, "The administration has made clear that it is discouraging India from proceeding with the acquisitions of Russian equipment, and there are important geostrategic considerations, particularly with (unintelligible) relationship to China. So, I think we have to look at what the balance is. And, of course, India's got some decisions in front of it, so it would be premature to say more. But this is something I look forward to working with you and other interested members,". Sourch: the tribune