News Media of Istkalen

[Istkalen]

Republic: Loime to lead illegal intervention to support Communist-reformist rebellion against Tabithist occupation

In opposition to the majority on the National Salvation Council and in the government, Colonel Kuldar Loime, the leader of the "young officers" within the Istkalenic military, has declared his intention to lead an illegal expedition into Istkalen's south to support Communist and Arian-reformist led rebels against Tabithist rule.

"Our government," he said at a press conference earlier today, "is composed of traitors. It is illegitimate in every conceivable way. It is, then, up to those few patriots who remain to act in the interest of the nation with whatever power is at their disposal. Here are our darkest days, the South of our country overrun by a criminal and foreign cult, and no one is willing to do anything at all. It is thus my, the highest of the loyal within the Istkalenic state, responsibility to drive them out."

The Istkalenic military being organized along territorial lines, Loime has asked territorial leaders to mass at the border of the Tabithist occupation in order to prepare for the intervention. Several have already responded, and are currently moving their forces, with little resistance from other leaders.

The rebellion Loime intends to support has been ongoing for the past five days, organized by the Federation of Women's Committees, local branches of the Communist Party, regional and local "People's Committees," and various Arian leaders opposed to "Pope Tabitha," and has seized control over large parts of the occupied territory, perhaps most notably the entirety of the city of Kirelesile, once Istkalen's largest city and still its de-facto capital, establishing a new, temporary "regional" government over the liberated regions and conducting certain economic and social reforms, redistributing property, arresting "corrupt" officials, and moving for the "repeal" of censorship and of anti-LGBT laws. Though opposed to many of his more nationalist aims, Loime insists, nevertheless, that it is the beginning of the greater “renaissance’ he speaks to spark.

[Istkalen]

Republic: Polling 10/10 - 17/10
conducted by Kaitmulen, 2.099 respondents

Party Preference (+/- from 10/9-17/9 poll)
note: the Christian Democrats have been banned by order of the Ministry of the Interior for "opposition to republican order," and were therefore not polled. The names of parties involved in ongoing government formation are italicized.

Communist Party (left-wing to far-left): 30,0% (+0,2)
Social Democratic Party (center-left): 15,1% (-)
National Resurrection Movement (far-right): 12,2% (-28,0)
National Unity (syncretic): 10,8% (NEW)
National Republican Party (right-wing): 10,6% (+4,5)
Union/Progress (center-right): 10,5% (+4,2)
Greens/Democratic Movement (center-right): 10,0% (NEW)
Agrarian Union (syncretic): 0.8% (-0,4)
Liberation (center, neutral): 0% (-0,8)

Government Approval

• approve: 50,4% (+50,2)
• disapprove: 40,1% (-59,0)
• no opinion: 9,5% (+8,8)

[Istkalen]

Republic: Íkrat refuses cooperation with far-right

Elizabeth Íkrat, leader of Istkalen's Communist Party and the current formateur, has announced that she will not be cooperating with the "extremist right" in forming a government, specifically ruling out the National Resurrection Movement of Andrus Liiv and the National Union of Colonel Kuldar Loime as participants in any future government led by her.

"It does not matter," she said at a press conference held earlier today, "that these forces command the support of 20% of the Istkalenic population. It would not matter if they commanded 90%. They are anti-democratic and praetorian; they cannot be trusted with a gram of power. We have seen what their type have turned this country into in the span of but a few months; we know what terrors and atrocities they will unleash if given a single inch. I have been tasked with the creation of a new government - it is my sacred duty to do so, and to ensure that what government I give the country will govern it well. To allow these monsters and freaks into the cabinet, to allow them anywhere near it, would be for me to betray it and thus surely doom the country to chaos and death."

Her primary focus, she says, will be to work within the parliament - public opinion not withstanding - to construct a broad coalition, reaching from left to right, able and willing to enact the reforms that she believes the country needs to stabilize itself and transition to civilian and democratic rule. That the people support one force or another, she insists, is of no matter; the tides of opinion and societal preferences are, to her, completely ephemeral. Whether a majority supports the parties in her coalition is, thus, to her, completely irrelevant - it is something that can change like the direction of the wind, and thus something that is little more than a triviality. It is more important, in her eyes, to secure the support of "genuine" and more permanent civil society - she points to trade unions, civil servants, and other long-entrenched interest groups, as represented by the "establishment" parties - for it is these, she believes, that define the course and development of the Istkalenic polity in the long term.

Íkrat's statement has received a wide array of reactions.

"It is heartening to know," said Inge Meier, interim leader of Istkalen's Social Democratic Party, "that we will not have a government of the insane and the power-hungry. That alone is a great advance for our country. However, this should not be the standard we hold our governments - especially this government, which will have the task of completely rebuilding the country's institutions in the aftermath of the NSC disaster - to. It ought to be higher, much higher. We should have assurances not merely that the government will be sane and civilian, but that it will be committed - firmly - to democratic values. And these, unfortunately, we do not have. For all her words about rejecting extremism and authoritarianism, Ms. Íkrat is completely willing - she even seems to prefer - to work with the most autocratic forces in Istkalen, so long as they are in the National Assembly. She is talking with the leaders of Union/Progress, a party whose raison d'etre is the abolition of democracy; she is talking with the leaders of the National Republican Party, who share the preferences of the NSC on every conceivable issue but the question of who is to rule; she is talking with the leaders of the Greens and the Democratic Movement, who have and will continue to combine all the worst tendencies of the Istkalenic right, authoritarianism, ultranationalism, bigotry, into one, demonic force. Yes, we will have a government of the qualified, of the stable, of civilians - but it seems unlikely that we will have a democratic government, and this is a tragedy."

"I suspected from the beginning," said Andrus Liiv, leader of the National Resurrection Movement, "that this woman was a Vard. And now she reveals it plainly before the Istkalenic people. Everyone can see, now, how deep the infiltration of the crows and the snakes is. Everyone can see how rotten our so-called government is. To arms, I tell you, to arms; there is no other option. We are still under occupation, we are still under the yoke of the northern hordes and the southern snakes; we must resist with all our power if we are not to perish under their unrelenting pressure."

"The nation," said Colonel Kuldar Loime, "is in need of healing. It is in need of rejuvenation, in need of reconstruction. And yet the politicians of this country, for the sake of their own power and their own petty struggles, refuse the compromises and the broad-based cooperation that would give birth to these things, they refuse that which would allow the nation to recuperate from its ordeal. For the sake of their egos, for the sake of their greed, they condemn the nation to death. I will repeat what I said when I first announced its creation. The National Union is and always will be open to work with anyone who is committed to our country; it is sad that I cannot say the same of this country's political class."

The acting President, Ilmaras Kalessed, is expected to give a statement on the issue tomorrow; most predict, considering her own ties to Íkrat and her traditionally left-wing stance in Istkalenic politics, that, though she called originally for a "broad-based" government, she will lend her continued support for Íkrat.

The sitting Prime Minister, Elspeth Oskon, however, has not commented at all, nor indicated that she will ever comment

[Istkalen]

The Messenger: Recap

You are listening to the Messenger. Here's our nightly recap of the day's news:

Oskon, Jezebel-Swift announce concordat

Prime Minister Elspeth Oskon and Reszelport Jezebel-Swift have announced that they have mutually agreed to a new "concordat" to define and regulate the relationship between the Republic and the Arian Church, replacing the fairly liberal 2005 Framework Agreement with a far more restrictive system that strips the Church of its power over the German Territories and severely limits its ability to proselytize and provide religious education.

The concordat is a major departure from past precedent. Since the conclusion of the Arian-Istkalenic conflict in 1973, the Arian Church has, but for a handful of short, "extraordinary" periods, possessed an unusual degree of autonomy, especially in comparison with other churches and religious institutions in Istkalen. Now, however, it is to be subject to perhaps the most state oversight of all those recognized by the Istkalenic state. Nevertheless, the Church appears to be united in support for the agreement; none of its major leaders, nor any of its most prominent adherents, have raised a single note of protest.

Isteresskemar, Reiner raise concerns about Íkrat's "anti-Czech" proclivities

Írenet Isteresskemar, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the de facto leader of the newly founded "Greens/Democratic Movement" in parliament, and Grete Reiner, co-leader of the National Republican Party, have raised concerns about the opinions of formateur Elizabeth Íkrat in regards to Istkalen's relations with the Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia, a central European country that Istkalen has enjoyed warm ties with since the end of the occupation. Though both have reiterated that they are in support of the government formation process and do not wish to challenge the leading role of the Communist Party in it, they insist that Íkrat's views on Czech Slavia are dangerous - enough so that, although she is formateur, another Communist figure ought to take the role of Prime MInister in her place when the new government is formalized.

"I have the greatest respect for Ms. Íkrat," said Istersskemar earlier today. "She led the charge against the NSC; she is one of our greatest patriots, an invaluable and irreplaceable force who has dedicated her life to the defense of our Republic and our democracy. Nevertheless, I cannot help but be perturbed by her unusual and irrational hatred - there is no other word for it - for the Czech state, one of our most steadfast allies. Though there is no one else in our country with her stature and strength, I fear that for her to become Prime Minister, as she is expected to be, would endanger our relationship with the Czechs - and thus weaken our international position. For these reasons, I believe that we ought to begin to consider other candidates for the position."

Reiner was more blunt. "We simply cannot have someone who is so virulently and irrationally anti-Czech in this office," she said. "Czech Slavia is our closest ally; it is, to me and to the vast majority of Istkaleners, a model state, one whose path we ought to emulate. Ms. Íkrat is dedicated to this country, I do not deny that, she is perhaps more dedicated to it than anyone else in politics, but these opinions of hers make her, unfortunately, unacceptable to me and to almost everyone else involved in government negotiations."

[Istkalen]

Republic: Greens/Democratic Movement to be officially known as the Farmer-Green Alliance

Irenet Isteresskemar has announced that her political alliance, formed of the Greens, her own political party, and the Democratic Movement, a group of ex-Liberation deputies in the National Assembly, will be named the Farmer-Green Alliance.

"Our movement does not," she said at a press conference earlier today, "have a name for itself. Our deputies in parliament refer to themselves simply by the name of the party or group of which they are members, as Greens or as partisans of the Democratic Movement; the media, on the other hand, calls us the ‘Greens/Democratic Movement.’ I feel - our leadership feels - and I am sure you all feel as well - that this is ridiculous. We are, firstly, one movement - two parties, yes, but one movement - and ought to present ourselves as such. And secondly, well, ‘Greens/Democratic Movement’ is an ugly name; it’s inelegant, unmemorable, both bad things for any political movement.”

“Our leadership, then,” she continued, “has decided to put an end to this miserable state of affairs. The central boards of both the Greens and the Democratic Movement have resolved to name our joint alliance the ‘Farmer-Green Alliance.’ It is a good name, a strong name, one that’s clear and snappy. It makes what we are and what we stand for clear—that we are the environmentalists and farmers of this country allied to defend our interests when they—and so often—intersect. The decision, I have to tell you, has already gone into effect; nevertheless, I promise you all that it will go for a vote, that you all, our members, those without whom our movement would not exist, will have the final say over whether the name is ultimately adopted. It is you who know best, after all, far better than we do - and you, I am sure, who will make the correct decision.”

The move has been widely interpreted as an attempt to place the alliance as a definitive successor to the Agrarian Union, which, while maintaining a significant parliamentary presence has collapsed in opinion polling—it gives the alliance the same identity, as an agrarian-environmentalist political grouping, while preparing its two member parties, the Greens and the Democratic Movement, to take the places of the two of the Agrarian Union, the Ecologists and the New Agrarians.

It is also seen as a confirmation of Isteresskemar’s intention to separate completely from the Agrarian Union. It has long been rumored that her relations with the rest of the party leadership were less than cordial, with her ardently nationalist and quasi-libertarian viewpoints clashing strongly with the progressive and often socialist inclinations of the Union establishment. Nevertheless, many believed that her decision to leave it and establish a new alliance with liberal politicians in the National Assembly was but a gambit meant to force her enemies within the Union to accommodate her. This “rebranding,” however, suggests that there was and is something more serious at play - of a deeper rift and of a genuine desire to establish an independent political movement.

Most expect the name change to be confirmed by the membership of both parties; few complaints, if any, have been made about it, and, in any case, they have become so centered around the figure of Isteresskemar that it is difficult to imagine them rejecting her directions and decisions, even if they are quietly opposed to them.

Reactions from the rest of the political spectrum have been sparing, if existent at all.

[Istkalen]

Nation: Polling 4/11 - 5/11
conducted by Isdenek, 781 respondents

Party Preference

Communist Party (far-left, in gov't formation): 35,1%
National Republican Party (center-right, in gov't formation): 15,3%
Social Democratic Party (left-wing): 11,8%
National Unity (center-right): 10,3%
Farmer-Green Alliance (center-right, in gov't formation): 10,1%
Union/Progress (center-right, in gov't formation): 8,9%
National Resurrection Movement (right-wing): 8,3%
Agrarian Union (left-wing): 0,2%
Liberation (center): 0%

Government Approval

• approve: 53,9%
• disapprove: 38,7%
• no opinion: 7,4%

[Istkalen]

Republic

Oskon dismissed by Censorate; replaced by Orlich

Citing the general dysfunctionality of her cabinet, as well as her recent decision to dismiss en masse a number of popular ministers, the Censorate of Istkalen has dismissed Elspeth Oskon as Prime Minister of Istkalen, replacing her with Ursula Orlich, who served as the country's provisional head of state for two months earlier this year.

"The chaos in government," read a statement the Censorate released on the issue, "is unacceptable. The decisions of the cabinet are not being implemented, ministers make decisions and issue orders without any degree of coordination between each other, and all the Prime Minister does is flail about and whine, before removing the competent from their positions. Her ineptitude is extraordinary; it has led and will continue to lead this country into a quagmire even deeper than the one it has just extricated itself from. This cannot continue. We are therefore dismissing Ms. Orlich from her position, and replacing her, with immediate effect, with Ms. Ursula Orlich, who we hope and trust will be up to the task of pacifying and stabilizing our beloved country."

Despite having both called the Istkalenic people "ungovernable" and handed control over the country to the NSC, Orlich has come to be widely respected as a strong and cool-headed stateswoman; though deeply unpopular during her short term as "State Protector" for her repressive actions against the opposition, many have re-evaluated her in light of the disorder that has prevailed in the time since her resignation, hailing her as one of the few sane and competent members of the political class, and even as the country's last hope. Her appointment has been met with acceptance and with the hope that she will at last bring a semblance of normalcy to Istkalenic governance.

Orlich is expected to, as first action, reinstate many, if not all, the ministers dismissed by Oskon. She has not, however, yet clearly outlined her intentions, and is not expected to until she is formally sworn in.

---

Uklertal and Laakonen announce exit from Social Democrats

Kondres Uklertal and Lauri Laakonen, as well as 66 of their supporters in the National Assembly, have announced their departure from the Social Democratic Party in favor of an organization of their own, tentatively named the Statebuilding Party, citing anti-democratic measures taken by Inge Meier, the SDP chairwoman.

"We agree, broadly," the two wrote in a statement published two days ago, "with the message of social democracy in Istkalen. We believe, just as strongly as Ms. Meier claims to, in the defense of liberal democracy, in the defense of civil and political rights, in the defense of social justice. Our departure is not motivated, then, by her decision to reorient the party away from its authoritarian past, as she may claim - not at all."

"We have made the decision," they continued, "to leave the Social Democratic Party simply because we believe that Ms. Meier has made it impossible to promote the social democratic ideology within its bounds. She has stifled interparty debate and democracy; she proclaims that it is her way or the highway, that she is to lead and we to obey. This is completely inappropriate, and is the beginning of a corruption that we feel - strongly - will lead to the discrediting of our movement and the end of any hope for liberalization and democratization in our country."

Their move is widely seen as the climax of a long interparty struggle for control between the environmentalist and nationalist factions of which they are leaders and the socialist faction of Meier. Though the party has, since its decision to abandon its prewar ideology, been united by a belief in liberal democracy and social progressivism, it has seen increasing division and discord over economic and cultural policies in particular, especially since the ascendance of the often combative Meier to her position.

The Statebuilding Party, though it has not yet elaborated upon its positions beyond its "transversality," is expected to take a position slightly to the right, in accordance with Uklertal and Laakonen's views, of the Social Democrats, adopting the anti-business-incorporation and laicitic stances associated with the nationalist right while maintaining a left-wing commitment to social progressivism and green policy.

Meier, nor any other high-ranking functionaries of the Social Democratic Party, has not yet reacted.

---

Íkrat suggests a government led by Arkalis

Amid an impasse in government negotiations over the issue of relations with the Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia, Elizabeth Íkrat, the current formateur, has suggested that Antras Arkalis, the Communist Party's rapporteur for finance and economics, become Prime Minister in her own place in order to mollify concerns over a rupture in relations.

"I cannot say that I am in favor of relations with Czech Slavia," said Íkrat, "especially considering the recent rumors of cult infiltration in their government, but I understand that many of those in our establishment and in government negotiations view them as vitally important and irreplaceable. I am not one to put my own personal beliefs and ideology over the health of the country, and so I will, in this case, concede. I am open to someone else from our party becoming Prime Minister - perhaps Mr. Arkalis, who I understand is well-liked and know has a long history in government."

The leaders of the National Republican Party, Grete Reiner and Kaisa Malk, and of the Farmer/Green Alliance, Írenet Isteresskemar and Liris Vesek, have responded to this proposal positively; nevertheless, all have continued to insist that they must have strong assurances that the new government will not change relations with Czech Slavia except to strengthen them.

"Mr. Arkalis," said Reiner, "is, to me, to all of us in negotiations, infinitely preferable to Ms. Íkrat, especially in regards to the Czech Slavia question. Nevertheless, Ms. Íkrat's opposition to the Czechs is so strong that I worry that it may still affect government policy. That she is not Prime Minister is to me, to many of us, not enough, even if it is a significant and good step forwards - we must have an assurance that there will be no change to our policy in regards to Czech Slavia, no antagonization made, that our government, as have all past governments, will be committed to furthering and deepening our relations with them."

[Istkalen]

Nation: Polling 12/11 - 13/11
conducted by Isdenek, 699 respondents

Party Preference
note that the banned National Union and National Resurrection Movement are no longer polled

Communist Party (far-left, in gov't formation): 34,7% (-0,4)
National Republican Party (center-right, in gov't formation): 15,1% (-0,2)
Social Democratic Party (left-wing): 13,9% (+2,1)
Statebuilding Party (center-left): 12,1% (new)
Farmer-Green Alliance (center-right, in gov't formation): 10,1% (-)
Union/Progress (center-right, in gov't formation): 9,0% (+0,1)
Agrarian Union (left-wing): 4,2% (+4,0)

with inclusion of major banned parties

Communist Party (far-left, in gov't formation): 30,0%
National Republican Party (center-right, in gov't formation): 15,0%
Social Democratic Party (left-wing): 13,7%
Union/Progress (center-right, in gov't formation): 8,7%
National Union (syncretic, banned): 8,1%
Farmer-Green Alliance (center-right, in gov't formation): 7,9%
Statebuilding Party (center-left): 6,1% (new)
National Resurrection Movement (far-right, banned): 5,3%
Christian Democrats (far-right, banned): 4,0%
Agrarian Union (left-wing): 1,2%

Scenario Polling

reintegration of the Farmer-Green Alliance into the Agrarian Union*

Communist Party: 28,7%
Agrarian Union: 25,1%
National Republican Party: 14,1%
Social Democratic Party: 13,8%
Union/Progress: 9,1%
Statebuilding Party: 9,0%

reintegration of Statebuilding into the Social Democrats

Communist Party: 34,1%
National Republican Party: 19,5%
Farmer-Green Alliance; 15,3%
Social Democratic Party: 15,1%
Union/Progress: 9,2%
Agrarian Union: 6,3%

Ayros Tiraki founds a party

Party of Ayros Tiraki: 74,1%
Social Democratic Party: 13,3%
Communist Party: 11,4%
Farmer-Green Alliance: 0,3%
Agrarian Union: 0,2%
Statebuilding Party: 0,2%
Union/Progress: 0,1%
National Republican Party: 0,1%

Government Approval

• approve: 72,3%
• disapprove: 10,2%
• no opinion: 17,5%

Preferred Prime Minister

Kaisa Malk (National Republican Party, right-wing): 25,1%
Antras Arkalis (Communist Party, left-wing): 20,1%
Elizabeth Íkrat (Communist Party, left-wing): 18,2%
Ursula Orlich (incumbent, non-partisan, center-right): 15,1%
Liris Vesek (Farmer-Green Alliance, center-right): 10,8%
other: 10,7%

[Istkalen]

Republic: Orlich announces restoration of National Duty, Public Distribution Service

Prime Minister Orlich has announced that her government, in order to respond to the "social and economic crisis" she says has developed in Istkalen, will be restoring National Duty, as well as the Public Distribution Service (PDS).

"Poverty and degradation," she said at a press conference held yesterday, "now rule in this country. The old mutualities have collapsed; the majority can no longer meet their basic needs. Assistance has dried up completely, and what little there is comes, now, in the form of cash - useless in so much of Istkalen. For us, this is an absolutely unacceptable state of affairs. We must abandon our present course; we must return to the systems that once served us so well, that ensured every child, every working citizen, every retiree a decent and basic standard of living."

National Duty, a form of corvee, and the PDS, a bureaucracy meant to redistribute the products of National Duty among the Istkalenic people as compensation, were previously abolished by the administration of Vistek Rikkalek and gradually replaced with income tax and a series of "living allowances." This decision was meant to bring Istkalen in line with international law and standards; however, the country has since seen profound economic and social instability, as a direct result of these changes, which replaced the direct provision of goods and services with cash transfers and thus left many of the most vulnerable unable to access the essentials that had once simply been given them by the state. Many experts have, then, long been calling for a restoration - and now, at last, the government seems to be acting.

Implementation will be slow by Istkalenic standards. Unlike previous welfare reforms, says Orlich, which made quick and immediate changes to systems of distribution and redistribution, the one she is embarking on will be "methodical and measured."

"We will not rush," she said, "the process. We will not run heedlessly ahead and break everything, as so many other past administrations have. We will work, instead, with the mutualities and workers' associations to see what is possible; we will discuss, negotiate, and come to a good, smart, methodical, and measured solution."

Nevertheless, she stressed the necessity of ensuring the fastest possible relief for the poorest communities in Istkalen.

"But we are, yes, in a crisis - and a crisis demands immediate action. We are not ignoring this when we speak of methodicality. We have already prepared a number of stopgap measures that establish a system of basic public distribution, through the Ministry of Public Distribution and with the assistance of the military and national police, for rural and degraded urban areas to ensure that the worst-off are relieved in these hardest of times. But we insist - a more permanent solution cannot be created, announced, and implemented in a day."

The decision has received harsh criticism from large swathes of the Istkalenic political spectrum.

"We are returning to the past," said Inge Meier, leader of the Social Democratic Party. "We are abandoning modernity in favor of an outdated, inhumane, and authoritarian model of forced labor. Is our aim not modernization? Is our highest aspiration not, as the Prime Minister herself has repeatedly insisted, equality with the rest of Europe? If they are as such, then why are we taking ourselves off the path to both with such a bizarre and disgusting measure?"

"That the abolition of National Duty and the PDS," said Kaisa Malk, co-leader of the National Republican Party, "was a tragedy is something no one denies. We are therefore in support of this measure. We are, however, not in support of its timing, nor its implementors. The Prime Minister ought to remember that hers is a transitional government - that she is not in her position to make ideological decisions, but simply to re-establish order and ensure a smooth return to normalcy and democracy."

"Ursula," said Andrus Liiv, the leading presenter for the Northern Radio and the leader of the far-right National Resurrection Movement, "reveals herself to be a Reitzmo-Vardic agent. Her proposal is an attempt to appeal to and pervert our traditional sentiments and beliefs to enslave us to the hordes in the North and the snakes of the South. Don't be fooled - the continuing J-TAI is making but another attempt to place us under its yoke!"

"Istkalen," said Colonel Kuldar Loime, the leader of the banned "National Union," "is not in need of slow and 'methodical' measures. We are a country on our deathbed; what we need is a shock to bring us back to life, not this diluted solution dripped at snail's pace into our mouths. Now, more than ever, we need immediate and decisive action - and this is absolutely not that. The National Union stands not for tepid prodding but for the immediate restoration of National Duty and the PDS."

Nevertheless, Orlich's decision enjoys broad popularity among the Istkalenic people, and is unlikely to be rejected when it comes to a vote in the National Assembly.

[Istkalen]

Republic: Polling 10/11 - 17/11
conducted by Kaitmulen, 2.144 respondents

Party Preference (+/- from 10/10 - 17/10 poll)

Communist Party (left-wing to far-left): 35,3% (+5,3)
Social Democratic Party (center-left to left-wing): 17,2% (+2,1)
Statebuilding Party (center-left): 14,3% (new)
Union/Progress (center-right): 11,5% (+1,0)
National Republican Party (right-wing): 9,1% (-1,5)
Farmer-Green Alliance (center-right): 6,3% (-3,7)
Agrarian Union (syncretic): 6,1% (+5,3)
other: 0,2%

Government Approval

• approve: 90,5% (+40,1)
• disapprove: 5,0% (-35,1)
• no opinion: 4,5% (-4,0)

[Istkalen]

Republic: Issue polling 10/11 - 17/11
conducted by Kaitmulen, 2.144 respondents

1. Was the country better off under the prewar government?

• YES: 81,3%
• NO: 15,2%
• other: 3,5%

2. Was the revolution of the 18th of April (fall of the prewar government and the beginning of the capitulation to Reitzmag and Vayinaod) positive or negative for the country?

• POSITIVE: 27,5%
• NEGATIVE: 68,0%
• other: 4,5%

3. Are you in favor of the restoration of National Duty (corvee) and the Public Distribution System (state distribution of basic goods in the place of Western-style welfare)?

• YES: 97,1%
• NO: 1,9%
• other; 1,0%

4. Are you in favor of the continued control of the labor exchanges (formerly elected institutions that connect the underemployed to work and provides retraining opportunities) by the Ministry of Public Distribution?

• YES: 59,3%
• NO: 39,7%
• other: 2,0%

5. Are you in favor of the continued appointment of local and regional people's committees (local governments) by the Ministry of the Interior?

• YES: 29,8%
• NO: 60,3%
• other: 9,9%

6. Do you believe that the mutualities (mutual-aid/social welfare organizations organized by local people's committees) should continue to exist?

• YES: 97,0%
• NO: 2,0%
• other: 1,0%

7. Do you believe that the workers' societies (local, vocation-specific organizations that organized social welfare, access to equipment and work, for members, now integrated into the broader, sectoral workers' associations) should be restored?

• YES: 9,5%
• NO: 89,5%
• other: 1,0%

8. Do you believe that prewar public clothing and appearance regulations (modesty laws, ban on gender non-conformity) should be restored?

• YES: 60,5%
• NO: 38,5%
• other: 1,0%

9. Do you believe that sex segregation should be reinstated?

• YES: 61,1%
• NO: 38,0%
• other: 0,9%

10. Do you believe that censorship on moral grounds, as was practiced in the prewar period, should be restored?

• YES: 60,9%
• NO: 38,2%
• other: 0,9%

11. Did you support the NSC?

• YES: 0,1%
• NO: 99,5%
• other: 0,4%

12. Did you support the J-TAI?

• YES: 0,9%
• NO: 98,1%
• other: 1,0%

13. Are you in favor of the new arrangements between the state and religious organizations, as defined bv the Concordat with the Arian Church and the 15 December Decrees regulating religious activity?

• YES: 60,3%
• NO: 38,7%
• other: 1,0%

14. Were you in favor of Indras Uskeled's economic reform (replacing all welfare with non-means-tested cash allowances, abolishing pensions, increasing the role of state planning, allowing the state to forcibly move workers between sectors), of 6 January 2023?

• YES: 5,1%
• NO: 93,9%
• other: 1,0%

15. Do you agree with the decision of the government to order the second imprisonment and dissolution of the House of Kareskenet (imprisonment of, forced name changes for, all the members of the former royal house of Istkalen)?

• YES: 95,5%
• NO: 3,5%
• other: 1,0%

16. Do you believe that the government should create a framework for the incorporation of economic enterprises?

• YES: 5,3%
• NO: 94,0%
• other: 0,7%

17. Do you believe that unskilled workers should legally be allowed to participate in non-government sponsored or organized economic activity?

• YES: 37,9%
• NO: 60,1%
• other: 2,0%

[Istkalen]

Republic: Farmer-Greens withdraw from government negotiations

The Farmer-Green Alliance has withdrawn from government negotiations, citing irreconcilable differences with the other involved parties on the issues of industrial development and economic management.

"We stand, firmly, for our own national tradition in all spheres - and above all on the question of the economy," said party leader Irenet Isteresskemar at a press conference earlier today. "We do not believe that, simply for the sake of convenience and so-called national prosperity, we ought to abandon our own methods for those of the West, for we would be selling our souls to the foreigners by doing so. So it is a no to their factories, a no to their plans for the parasitical unskilled, a no to all of it. Our Istkalen comes first, always."

The disagreement stems from an issue that has long been central to Istkalenic politics - the essential contradiction between the country's cultural commitment to smallholding and the preservation of the crafts and the need to remain competitive in an increasingly efficient and more industrialized world. While much of the political spectrum has accepted the need for compromise in strategic sectors, particularly mining, energy, and heavy industry, almost all which are socialized and run according to national economic plans developed by their corresponding workers' associations in concert with the Ministry of Industry and the Ministry of Public Distribution, significant parts of it - the Farmer-Green Alliance foremost among this sector - have rejected it, insisting that competitiveness is possible in a system that completely preserves the traditional economy, and that whatever lags or losses that may be caused by this choice are a necessary sacrifice.

Governments before have been formed between forces on opposite sides of the issue, but they generally have been led by and conceded completely to the anti-modernizers. The current situation is without precedent in Istkalenic history.

The formateur, Elizabeth Ikrat, has condemned the Alliance's decision as "irrational," "unpatriotic," "detached from reality," and "an unnecessary barrier to the formation of a democratic barrier" and reached out, in place of offering concessions to Isteresskemar, to the pro-industrial Statebuilding Party in order to create a parliamentary majority. Acting head of state Ilmaras Kalessed has made no objection to this; she has expressed, in fact, her continued desire to further extend Ikrat's mandate until she is able to form a government.

None of the other partners, Union/Progress and the National Republican Party, in negotiation have yet commented; both, however, are strongly pro-industrial, and are not likely to push for reconciliation.

[Istkalen]

Republic: Mass arrests across Istkalen

Over fifteen thousand people have been arrested across Istkalen today in a mass operation meant to paralyze the work of a number of political and social organizations the government has deemed to be working against the state and the democratic transition.

Arrests were focused on leaders and influential members of and within the National Union, the National Resurrection Movement, the "original" rump Social Democratic Party, and the Christian Democratic Party, in addition to the executive and creative staff of a number of illegal media groups, particularly the Northern Radio, Awakening, and the Popular Appeal. Almost all of the targeted groups are notable for their nationalist outlook, support for the prewar government and ideology of Istkalen, and ardent opposition to the government.

The move is widely seen as a last-ditch effort to limit and control the influence of the radical and revolutionary right in Istkalen. Since the beginning of the occupation, these groups and others within their general ideological current have worked to delegitimize and destabilize the Istkalenic state, disseminating conspiracy theories, provoking intense xenophobia, encouraging mass and violent hysteria, and orchestrating coordinated takeovers of local government as to give themselves an organizational and political base for outright rebellion. Though the state has taken often violently suppressive action against these activities - perhaps most notably with the 2021 ASPIS raids conducted prior to the launching of a European peacekeeping mission in the country -it has hitherto been fairly limited in scope, focusing primarily on detaining only those at the very top and curbing active violence, and has in general not been successful in the long term.

With the chaos of the far-right NSC still in extremely recent memory, however, the urgency of solving this issue has intensified - and the threshold of acceptability lower. Suppressive action that might have been unthinkable a year ago began to enter public and government discourse as a possible solution - and this, it seems, is the result.

The arrests have overwhelmed policing and justice systems across the country. Almost every jail is at or above capacity, with overcrowding, especially in rural areas, common. Police forces and local state-affiliated militias have, in many cases, had to requisition abandoned or empty housing or other buildings to house the detained because of the extreme lack of space in normal facilities; some, including in Kirelesile, have made the decision to place some in hastily built corrals, out in the open. Courts are also ill prepared to deal with the sudden influx of cases; several judges, who wish to remain anonymous, have told Republic that the justice system will likely spend years going through all the arrests, with other cases being deprioritized. While the government has proposed a bill, to the National Assembly, establishing a system of special courts, with special, faster procedures, for those arrested in this sweep, whether it passes is still unknown.

[Istkalen]

Republic

Ikalsser and Raadik demand withdrawal from negotiations

Makketis Ikalsser and Eliise Raadik, who led the National Republican Party from March 2022 to February 2023, have called for the party to withdraw from government negotiations, arguing that it must completely rule out the "austerity-minded" Communist Party in order to "defend the welfare of the Istkalenic people."

"The National Republican Party," a joint statement authored by the two reads, "has always stood against those who seek to undermine our Istkalenic solidarity. Every attempt to chip away at our welfare state and republican economic tradition it has resisted. It must not stop now, at this most crucial of points in history. The government that is to be formed will be the first government of a new era in Istkalenic politics - and thus, in the decisions it takes, definitive. Its composition and the direction it takes will affect not just us, but our children, and their children as well. To acquiesce to an austerity government - the almost certain result of supporting a Communist-led coalition - would be to betray them. Let us keep to our party tradition then; let us remain stalwart against the threat before us."

Ikalsser and Raadik further insisted that the party return to the basic principles and redlines they set at the beginning of their tenure as leaders - protection of National Duty and the Public Distribution Service, restoration of the indecency laws of the prewar period, and opposition to legal business incorporation - in order to "preserve the country for the generations after us."

The debate reflects a growing division within the ex-communists who have become the majority within the party, with strict nationalists, like Ikalsser and Raadik, on one side and pragmatists, like current leaders Kaisa Malk and Grete Reiner, on the other. Though united in nationalism and a strong commitment to economic egalitarianism at the time of their mass departure from the Communist Party and entrance into the National Republican fold, the past year has seen increasingly harsh friction within their ranks, especially at times when, like now, government participation in exchange for ideological concessions is a likely prospect.

The party's mainline leadership has not yet responded, nor is it expected to ever do so.

---

Uskeled releases notes, recordings that suggest Arkalis to be primary drafter of unpopular economic reform

Former Prime Minister Indras Uskeled, most notable for her unpopular economic and welfare reform that abolished pensions, replaced all welfare with flat, universal cash allowances, and allowed the state to forcibly move workers between sectors, has published, ostensibly for the sake of "transparency," a collection of notes, journals, and recordings written and made during her tenure in office.

The vast majority have to do with the formulation and drafting of the reform, and implicate many of the figures involved in current government formation - especially Antras Arkalis, Uskeled's Minister of Finance and the Communist candidate for the Prime Ministership - in the development of its worst aspects.

"We have to do away with it all," Arkalis is heard saying on one recording, dated 26 December 2022. "We are in over our heads. It's unsustainable. We have to cut now, and we have to cut hard. We can't afford anything else."

Arkalis went on to insist upon the total abolition of all welfare, with only a meager basic income - "perhaps 200 to 250 ketsels, and then limited only to the bottom half of all earners, or even the bottom quarter, or even the bottom eigth" - taking its place. Though the actual welfare reform would be significantly less harsh, the influence of this remark - particularly in its proposal of a basic income to replace traditional welfare =- can be seen.

Arkalis, in another recording, also appears to have been the first to suggest the idea of seizing and abolishing pensions in order to service state debt.

"What use," he can be heard saying, "is there in showering money, in such an unequal way as well, upon the unproductive? It's a money hole, that's what it is, a money hole and nothing more. And we have nothing to spare. I think we ought to take this money we're essentially burning and spend it on something more pressing."

He becomes, in later recordings and notes, the loudest and most enthusiastic advocate for the measure.

Uskeled, for her part, appeared to have served as a foil to Arkalis. Though she consistently supported reform and outright austerity in her notes and in her recordings, she also consistently refused his radicalism, and generally acted as the most fiscally generous of the cabinet members.

"It needs to be social, it needs to be equal, it needs to be sustainable. That is our exigence on the welfare question," she is heard responding to Arkalis on the 26 December recording. "We must cut, but we must cut with a bit of sense, not willy-nilly but in a way that affects the Istkalenic people as little as is possible."

The proposal she goes on to make is one that is more generous than the ultimate reform, ending most of the in-kind welfare system, but replacing it with a low universal basic income, which she terms a "basic allowance," on top of which would be created vaguely Western-style, if spare, systems of social insurance for health, retirement, disability, and under or unemployment. It is one that she holds to until the last stages of the drafting of the reform, where she finally concedes to Arkalis in the wake of the conflict in Svarna Surya.

The public has received the collection with shock, but also skepticism. While there has been an immediate turn in opinion against Arkalis, the vast majority appear to believe that the extremity of his suggestions - and the apparent softness of Uskeled's - has been either exaggerated or taken out of context.

No political forces, including Arkalis, have yet commented.

[Istkalen]

Republic: An interview with Kalju Ilves

I: Thank you for having agreed to meet with us, Mr. Ilves.

KI: It's my pleasure.

I: Now, you headed the country's cabinet at some of the most turbulent times in its history: through the transition away from socialization, through the aftermath of Rikkalek's resignation, through Orlich's "restoration of order," through the NSC period. Your competence, your record, in doing so has - continues to be - very hotly debated among the public. What, then, is your own evaluation of your tenure?

KI: I don't think anyone sane disputes the necessity of my administration's actions towards the socialization - it was a poorly thought out mess from the beginning that I am very proud of having forced an end to - so I think I will turn to the issue of my leadership after that particular episode.

What people have to understand is that Rikkalek's departure threw the state into complete disorder. He had spent his tenure dividing its branches and sectors against themselves so as to enshrine himself as the only uniting factor, and so, of course, as soon as he left, everything fell apart. Governance became virtually impossible. That my administrations were able to hold the country together in any sense was a miracle, and I think people should be more appreciative of that. There is much that I regret - but at the same thing I think I, I think my administration, ultimately did as good as a job as was possible under the circumstances.

I: But the NSC -

KI: I had no power during the NSC period. No one in the civilian cabinet did. I think it's ridiculous to bring anything that happened then as an indictment of me or those in my administration.

I: Alright, then. As much as you say that nothing better was possible, people don't seem to believe it. They look back to the relative successes of the Social Democrats in '05 or '06, when the internal situation was much more fraught, or to Communist rule after '89 and the certainly more fruitful efforts of that administration to maintain stability and basic welfare, and then back to your government, and they can think only that, well, if these other people were able to do so much better, in considerably worse conditions, then why can't these people do the same now?

KI: I don't think there's any comparison to be made here. We did not have a state apparatus; they did. Again, I do not think people quite understand the damage that Rikkalek did. He destroyed all the bonds and institutions that had defined Istkalenic governance for decades to put himself in their place, and then decided to vanish and leave us with the burnt out shell he left behind. No one else has ever had to deal with this; only us.

I: But people do know that Rikkalek did these things. There is a reason why his approval rating is currently in the sewer; there is a reason he had to disappear. It simply is that much worse has happened to the country - look at the chaos of '96, or of '03, for example - without the government failing quite as it did under your watch.

KI: You prove my point. What he did was worse than '96 and '03, but people don't understand that.

I: In what way?

KI: He destroyed the civil service. He pitted the workers' associations against the courts and the Censorate. He constantly shifted state power between this faction and that solely to create disorder and to force everyone to rely on him. We have never had a head of state so egotistical and destructive as this in our modern history.

I: I don't think there's anything more to say on this subject, so let's move to another. You left the Social Democratic Party recently for the Statebuilders; why?

KI: Ms. Meier has led the party away from its foundations and towards an extreme liberalism. She has effectively abandoned its committment to the social state in favor of promoting austerity politics and the type of uncontrolled, libertinian behavior that undermines the trust needed to maintain a solidaristic society. I will have nothing to do with it. The future of true social democracy in this country, I feel, lies not with her but with Ministers Uklertal and Laakonen, who are far truer to the original principles of the ideology and who I trust to lead it back to power.

I: You yourself supported "austerity politics," at least in the eyes of the people, during your leadership of the party; why the change?

KI: There has been no change; I never supported them. I believed - still believe - in a more active state that provides people basic insurance complementing what the mutualities and workers' associations offer. That is the opposite of austerity politics; it is an addition, not a substraction, that brings togther, not takes apart, our society.

I: And the difference between this and what Ms. Meier proposes?

KI: Ms. Meier wants to abolish the mutualities and workers' associations in favor of a very weak, Western-style welfare state, and one, at that, whose primary principle will not be the people's welfare but instead "fiscal sustainability." Hers is an attack on the social state, it is an attack on all social principles, it is a path towards egotism, poverty, and collapse. It is the perfect distillation of austerity politics; I don't see how one can conflate it with any of my proposals.

I: Nevertheless, the Statebuilders don't make the same distinction; they have called politics like yours "austerity politics."

KI: That is not true. I don't know where you got that from.

I: "There are social politics, and there are money-politics. There is no overlap between the two. Whoever speaks of such things is an austeritymonger." So said Kondres Uklertal just last month.

KI: I don't see the relation.

I: I think it's very clear: Uklertal - and by extension the Statebuilders - believes that there is no place for money in the solution to the social question. They believe, in fact, that anyone who even suggests that there is is a proponent of austerity. Your proposal is to involve money in the Istkalenic welfare state; you, then, in their eyes, support austerity politics.

KI: This is a very gross misinterpretation of what Kondres said. He was expressing what is a very common social democratic sentiment, that profit - money-politics - has no place in our social system.

I: I've never heard of "money-politics" being used to refer to profit. I've only seen it used to refer to the literal usage of money as a solution to political issues.

KI: Then you don't get around much, not in politics, at least. What a shame, I used to believe Republic had a higher caliber of staff. Regardless, even if the Statebuilders did genuinely believe me to be an advocate for austerity, what difference would it make? It's a matter of semantics; regardless of what they think or do not think, I am not a supporter of austerity, and can only be made one through the distortion of definitions.

I: You and your new party criticize Meier and the Social Democrats as they stand under her direction for being supporters of austerity politics solely because of their desire to intoduce cash-transfers to the welfare state, before then advocating for very similar policies which you claim are different because of but a few minor details. Isn't the hypocrisy of this clear?

KI: Firstly, our proposals are hugely divergent from those of the Social Democrats, we are not for a replacement of the social state with money, we are very much for the opposite. I don't see how anyone sane could see it otherwise. So you are making things up wholesale; perhaps we are hypocrites in this fantasy world you have created, but certainly not in the real one. Secondly, what on earth does this have to do with the issue of whether or not I myself am a proponent of austerity? Stop with these diversions.

I: Well, I'm sorry, but that seems to be time. Thank you, again, for having come, it was very enlightening.

[Istkalen]

Republic: Polling 30/12 - 6/1
conducted by Kaitmulen, 2011 responses

Party Preference (+/- 10/11 - 17/11 poll)

Communist Party (left-wing to far-left): 27,1% (-8,2)
Social Democratic Party (center-left to left-wing): 17,0% (-0,2)
Statebuilding Party (center-left): 14,7 (+0,4)
Agrarian Union (syncretic): 10,5% (+4,4)
Farmer-Green Alliance (center-right): 10,3% (+4,0)
National Republican Party (right-wing to far-right): 10,2% (+1,1)
Union/Progress (center-right): 9,3% (-2,2)
*other; 0,9%

Government Approval

• approve: 91,0% (+0,5)
• disapprove: 7,1% (+2,1)
• no opinion: 1,9% (-2,6)

[Istkalen]

Republic: Environment Ministry to be split

Prime Minister Ursula Orlich has announced that she intends to split the Ministry of the Environment, currently led by Kondres Uklertal, into three new ministries: a Ministry of the Climate, a Ministry of Resource Management, and a Ministry of Conservation.

"The Environment Ministry," she wrote in a statement released earlier today by her office, "handles a bevy of increasingly unrelated tasks. It is responsible for almost everything related, even if only tangentially, to the issue of the environment, from assessing the carbon intensity of supply chains both domestic and international to maintaining national conservatories. It has become, as a result, excessively bloated and difficult to manage."

"In the interests of effective governance, then," she continued, "the government has prepared a bill to divide it into a number of more specialized ministries. This will considerably simplify its work, reducing bottlenecks in organization and allowing for considerably more efficiency and transparency."

If created, the Ministry of the Climate will assume the responsibility of setting and levying emission taxes, the Ministry of Resource Management of creating regulations and setting fees around natural resource extraction, and the Ministry of Conservation of managing conservatories and other protected areas held by the government.

The decision has been praised by environmentalists and civil service reform activists alike as a major step forwards for both green policy and bureaucratic efficiency, and is expected to pass the National Assembly by a wide margin, with all political parties having expressed their support for the reform. Nevertheless, many have their doubts.

"There have been rumors," said a clerk for a prominent deputy in the National Assembly, "that [one of the parties] in the National Assembly is, or was, planning to bring a motion of no-confidence against Orlich. It is quite likely, at least in my opinion, that this is her trying to create sinecures for the party's leaders in order to head off this threat and preserve her own position."

Others raised concerns about the future repercussions of what is nominally a caretaker government making major political decisions.

"It began," said a trade unionist who wishes to remain anonymous, "with National Duty, and it continues here. This government, which we were told was to be one of transition alone, is making decisions on the important political questions of the time. It is usurping what should be the responsibility of a genuinely democratic government. I fear the precedent this may set; will we have, in the future, demissionary governments, technocratic caretaker governments, making impactful policy, doing this and that, without a democratic mandate, as Orlich has?"

With support for the government so broad, and with this decision in particular being so uncontroversial among the political class, however, this opposition is unlikely to gain ground.

The bill is scheduled to be voted on the 31st of January, 2024; if passed, the process of implementation will begin on 1 February and end on the same date next year.

[Istkalen]

Nation: An interview with the Statebuilding Party's Luke Kareskenet

Luke Kareskenet, trade unionist, Catholic leftist, and former partisan of the shortlived party "The Center," has emerged as a leading figure in the nascent Statebuilding Party, an environmentalist and softly nationalist split from the Social Democrats that is currently the country's third most popular political party. Though he is far from its most popular figure - that position goes to Kalju Ilves, who served as the country's foreign minister from July 2019 to April 2021 and as Prime Minister between May and December of 2022 and February and July of 2023 - he is nevertheless a force in his own right. Much of the current clamor around the party can be attributed to him: he was the primary drafter of its popular manifesto, "New Security for Istkalen," centered around green investment and the defense of Istkalen's current welfare state, while his identity as the de-facto head of the royal House of Kareskenet in the wake of the disappearance of his cousin, Vistek Rikkalek, has given the party an important, symbolic anchor in the country's increasingly mythologized and idealized past.

Our correspondent, Kestalas Milresile, spoke with him yesterday, discussing his party, the country - and a bit of family drama.

---

KM: Thank you for agreeing to this interview. Let's get right into it. A lot of people think it's strange that you - especially given your political and religious background, you are traditionally someone who has belonged to the liberal center, in the current of the old radicals, and of course, you are a Christian - are a member of a firmly social democratic, laicitist, and nationalist party. And so I wanted to ask - why? Why the Statebuilders above, say, the Farmer-Green Alliance, which has absorbed most of your old colleagues, including your sister, Mary, or the Social Democrats, who have become something of a pole around which anti-laicitists have gathered?

LK: I believe, above all else, that the state must respect and preserve human dignity. It must support the natural communities that allow for dignity's realization - the mutualities, the workers' associations, and, for me and for many others in this country, the family. And it must work against those conditions that erode dignity - poverty, inequality, the degradation of the environment. This was why I participated in the Center, and it is why I am now with the Statebuilders. It was and is only them, at least as I see it, who genuinely hold to and are willing to defend these principles.

KM: Why do you think others who believe the same things you do, like, again, your sister, have chosen otherwise?

LK: The Statebuilders have a very statist inclination. It doesn't matter much to me because I think the type of statism, of centralization, they espouse is necessary - there can be no real defense of the community, of the person, without the exercise of state power - but it puts many other people off, and not without reason. In our country, the state has often victimized intermediary bodies, victimized people, trampled on their rights in favor of very material, pagan ideals; I do not blame, then, my friends and colleagues for being so wary of it.

I also think that their positions are being slightly misconstrued, misinterpreted, by the public. I know that my sister, for example, has criticized some of the excesses of the Farmer-Greens, publically as well - she does not like their opposition to our social state, she does not like their criticism of the community, their affinity for the mechanical contract. And I know that a lot of others close to us, of our background, agree with her. They aren't wholeheartedly agreeing with the movements they have joined; in many cases they are very far from the actual positions of those movements, and have only joined them because they fear state power and see other state-critical parties as being too far away from their ideals.

KM: How do you think they might be convinced to change their minds?

LK: We would need to prove in practice that an active state can help and preserve communities, can respect the essential freedoms of the person. This distrust has formed over a very long period of time, and words alone will not make it go away.

KM: Moving on, you are a fairly major figure in the Statebuilding Party. You drafted its current manifesto, you sit on its central committee, and you are one of its negotiators in the government talks. Given your position, given your knowledge, what would you say are your party's main priorities for the immediate future?

LK: We want to hasten the re-establishment of National Duty and the Public Distribution System and to create an investment fund, or agency, to equalize the levels of development across the country and expand our green industry and energy. Our country suffers from slow growth and severe regional inequality; the collapse of our welfare system has also immiserated many people, especially in rural and blighted urban areas. These conditions have denied many Istkaleners the dignity they are entitled to, and so, naturally, we want to push forwards policy to work against them - to invest in growth that will put our country on par with the rest of Europe, in development that will end the shameful differences we see between Kirelesile and the countryside, in solidarity that will relieve those who have been left to starve by past, negligent governments.

KM: How successful would you say the party has been in negotiations to this point?

LK: Very successful. I don't want to say anything more.

KM: Who would you say have been your primary partners, or allies, we might say, in the negotiations?

LK: The Agrarian Union. They, of course, only joined after we did - but they have been very supportive of the vast majority of our goals, from regional investment to even smaller things, like our push to preserve the autonomy of the workers' associations. I am not sure whether we would have had quite the same success without them - in the few days we were in negotiations without them, we certainly saw much more pushback against us than we see now.

KM: A lot of people are under the impression that you are closest to the National Republicans - you yourself, for a while, were part of that party, as was Uklertal, while your stated priorities, at the very least, are very similar.

LK: This has not been the case. It was surprising to us as well, we believed that we shared much in common, but the National Republicans, in reality, are the most opposed to our participation out of all the parties in negotiations. They have become a party of culture war, hysterically so. They have no priorities other than fighting what they call "foreign influence." And they see us, along with the Communists, as a party completely loyal to a foreign ideology, completely beholden to foreign interests. So we have ended up as their enemy number one, policy similarities notwithstanding.

KM: Why do you think this is?

LK: We are committed to the environment, for one. That, for them, is a non-starter; they see green politics as something alien to this country. They also see Laakonen and I as unacceptable. Laakonen favors cultural autonomy too much, which they see as some form of treason, his otherwise fairly ardent nationalism notwithstanding. I, for my part, am Catholic, and so they think that I am an agent of the Vatican sent here to place this country under Papal rule.

KM: Do you think they will be willing to cooperate with you in government?

LK: No. But they will almost certainly form a government with us. They will do anything in their power to dilute our influence; to remain in opposition would leave them powerless. Our cabinet, however, would absolutely not be functional.

KM: Is a government without them possible?

LK: Yes. The Farmer-Greens are not as irreconcilable, in my opinion, as they seem to be; they are very amenable to compromise. And with them, there is a path to a majority without the National Republicans.

KM: Moving on, I wanted to talk about your cousin, our dear former Head of State, Vistek Rikkalek. What on Earth has happened to him?

LK: None of us know. We were not particularly close to him; he was the black sheep of our family.

KM: Any ideas?

LK: None at all. He does a lot of things on a whim, though, he was always very capricious. I suppose he might have gotten it in his head to disappear into the woods or something, or to flee to somewhere else, perhaps on another identity - but nothing really concrete.

KM: Who do you think might know where he is?

LK: Haven't the faintest clue. He had no friends, never had any. He was like that.

KM: I'm afraid that's time. Thank you for having come.

[Istkalen]

Nation: Isteresskemar fishes for far-right support

Irenet Isteresskemar's Farmer-Green Alliance - her right-wing alternative to the increasingly progressive Agrarian Union - has fallen on hard times. As it falters in polls in the aftermath of its withdrawal from government negotiations, its local affiliates and units have begun to abandon it in favor of other parties - particularly the Statebuilders and National Republicans - that they see as having a better chance at holding broad influence over policy and the population in the future. Meanwhile, infighting has broken out in its ranks as reformists within the party, led by ex-National Republican Liris Vesek, seek to seize control of the party apparatus and move it towards the center.

Isteresskemar, it seems, is thus taking a stand in an effort to reunite the party and recoup its losses. Yesterday, at a rally in Kirelesile, she made a speech calling for a special party congress to develop a new manifesto, demanding a move to the radical, populist right.

"Let us return," she said, "to our true Istkalenic values; let us stand stalwart in their defense, against the compradors who want to sell us to the Reitzmics and the Vards, against the foreign liberalisms that seek to tear our country apart. Let us fight for our freedom, our independence, our roots; let us be real patriots, who will go down in the memory of our people as heroes in a time of extraordinary distress."

Among other things, she argued that the party should officially endorse a rapid transition, through massive investment and unfavorable taxation, away from industry to what she called, "green, national craft," coupled with the "radical democratization" of both workers' associations and people's committees, the abolition of the Censorate, courts of examination, courts of justice, and traditional civil service, and the pardoning of "political prisoners" arrested in the 14th December operation against far-right extremists.

Her proposals parallel, almost perfectly, those previously championed by Andrus Liiv, former presenter for the banned "National Radio" and founder of the National Resurrection Movement, in their strong opposition to the West - especially Western industry - and to the traditional Istkalenic state, a part of the same, novel current of right-wing populism that emerged in the aftermath of the occupation.

Given that there is no legal party, as of now, that supports these positions, her intentions are clear: move the Farmer-Greens as close as is possible to Liiv so as to occupy this empty space and gain support among currently demobilized right-wing populists, stopping the bleeding of support while curbing the ability of moderates like Vesek to act against her without causing the implosion of the party.

Whether she will be successful, however, remains to be seen. Isteresskemar's current support within the party is unclear; a congress could very well weaken her and lead to Vesek's faction taking control. It is also doubtful whether her proposals, if put into place, would gain the party any support among the factions of the far-right she seeks to court; in the relatively short time they have existed as an influential political force, they have been intensely distrustful of parliamentary and party-politics, near-uniformly preferring to act "directly:" violently and extra-legally.

No clear reaction has yet been made by any political force; the party's central committee will vote on calling a congress in two days.

[Istkalen]

Republic

Ikalsser, Raadik deliver ultimatum to National Republican leaders

pictured: Eliise Raadik in Revolution Square in Kirelesile

Makketis Ikalsser and Eliise Raadik, who led the National Republican Party from June of 2022 to February of 2023, have issued an ultimatum to the party's current leadership, demanding that it refocus itself on defending what they term the "social state" - the welfare state and the continued social ownership of heavy industry - or risk them, currently the two most popular figures in the party, leaving to begin a movement of their own.

"The party's current approach," the two wrote, "has been disastrous. It has alienated those who might have otherwise been our most stalwart partners, has marginalized us in political discourse; it risks leaving us a party of the fringe, perpetually unpopular and outside of power. We have traditionally been a party of government, a serious, respectable party that can be trusted to rule in the service of the common good. For the sake of the Istkalenic people, we must reject the current course and remain so."

They further claimed that they had the support of the "majority" of the party's parliamentary faction, as well as the "lion's share" of its local and regional affiliates, and that they and their allies would "not hesitate to" abandon the National Republican Party if leadership refused their demands.

Their threats come after months of infighting between their nationalist faction, hardline and "idealistic" in its support for laicitism, opposition to decentralization, and advocacy for "syndicalist" socialism, and the "pragmatic" party mainstream, which has sought to moderate the party in order to appeal to the elitist, civic-nationalist sensibilities of the "mainstream" Istkalenic right; they are the apparent culmination of repeated clashes over the future direction of the party, especially as regards its participation in government negotiations.

Whether party leadership will respond is as of yet unknown.

Sepp leaves Union/Progress, joins Statebuilders

pictured: Minister Sepp outside of the Imperial Palace in Liresile

Eliise Sepp, the incumbent Minister of Defense and the longest serving of any official in the current Istkalenic government, has announced that she will be leaving Union/Progress to join the nascent Statebuilding Party.

"I have had enough," she wrote in a statement released yesterday, "of the corruption, the nepotism, the entitlement. I joined Union/Progrses in service of a vision of a better country - a democratic, progressive, forward-looking Istkalen, free of the feudal, clerico-statist mentalities that had plagued its past. The past few years, however, have proven to me that they have no interest in democracy, no interest in progress, no interest in any kind of improvement. I have watched, again and again, my colleagues, who speak with grand words before the public, promising great reform, snuff out any and all real promise of change. And I can watch no longer.

"I am therefore," she continued, "leaving Union/Progress. I will no longer lend my name, lend my work, to a clique so full of the self-serving and the treacherous. I intend to join the political project of the Statebuilders, whose leaders I have long admired and whose commitments - to development, to the climate, to the cause of the rule of law and to democracy - I find myself in alignment in."

Sepp had been widely viewed as one of the founding members of Union/Progress, having been a part of the clique of SDP-affiliated technocrats that formed its nucleus. Her role in helping consolidate the authority of the Republic and funnel the social change of the 18th of April "revolution" into the "Internal Revolution" of Kerel and Ikomar only deepened this association in the public eye. Her decision thus came as an extraordinary shock to many, both within and outside of the party.

It was, however, not entirely unexpected. While she was generally seen as a party stalwart, it had long been rumored that she disliked the party mainline, especially as regarded the questions of public sex segregation and LGBT rights, both of which she was well-known to hold progressive positions on. Her work to democratize the military, coupled with her longtime friendship with Lauri Laakonen, co-leader of the Statebuilders, Minister of Culture, and head of the Istkalenic secret police, had also been seen as inclining her towards the positions of the moderate left that the Statebuilders currently represent, rather than the ardent elitism that Union/Progress has come to be associated with. Loyal as she appeared to be, she nevertheless had long been showing signs of disagreement; a break was by no means ever thought an impossibility.

Her decision is likely to broaden the Statebuilder base, giving it appeal among voters of the moderate right who may be unsatisfied with the populism of the NRP and Farmer-Greens and the ultra-elitism of Union/Progress, while also possibly bringing some local affiliates and machines loyal to her person into its fold. Paradoxically, Union/Progress is unlikely to be strongly affected; its core base is strong and highly loyal, and a genuine fracture in its ranks is unlikely.