Our Top 10 of 2012 - European Edition

Our most read and commented on Europe posts ranged from Great Power Politics and the future of European Construction to well, British Royal tops and bottoms. But readers had something to say - and much of it very personal - about just about everything.

The Best and Worst Countries to Be a Woman - and the Worst. In one of our two most-read posts of the year, Europe fared well, but Canada topped the list for the best country in which to be a woman.

In Letter to Friends, Slain U.S. Ambassador Expressed Hope. This was a very personal post by Harvey Morris, our Europe blogger, on his friend J. Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador slain in Benghazi, Libya.

‘Fragile' Australian Radio Hosts Get Counseling After Nurse's Death. This heart-rending story demonstrated how truly small our global village has become, touching on the tragedy of a suicide in Great Britain and a mistake in Australia and engendered worldwide interest, generating more than 200 comments.

U.N. Report from Rio on Environment a ‘Suicide Note'. This was our report on the best of the Web coverage of the Rio+20 talks. A follow up of sorts after the Durban climate conference generated almost 100 comments: Ignoring Planetary Peril, a Profound ‘Disconnect' Between Science and Doha

Why Socialist Europe Is Better for Families than America. This post relating the story of an American mother of two living in France and posted another site started a debate that included more than 150 comments on the relative virtues of the French and American social and economic systems. The comments were among the smartest we've read on the Web.

The Future of the Euro: Jack Ewing Answers Readers' Questions. In answer to our Ask About the Euro post, which generated 50 questions and comments, the IHT's chief European economics correspondent wrote a primer on the currency and its future.

It was one of many posts on our most popular European theme of the year, including this one: Europe's Economy Is Eating Its Young - And Things Are About to Get Worse and this one: Greeks Unite Against Lagarde After ‘Tax-Dodgers' Jibe and this one: Subtext: Germany Threatens Europe, Again.

Olympics Spectacle Stirs Great British Pride. What Did You Think? A lot.

Canada's Latest Iranian Caper. Harvey's posts on Mideast affairs, though not technically about Europe, touched on Europe's most sensitive foreign interests. This one generated near ly 100 comments.

Harvey's analysis of Syria was especially original and insightful, based on his decades of knowledge of the region: What Syria Looks Like From Tehran and a post explaining the roots of Russia's support of Syria,

And then there was this. Topless Royal Photos Expose Public's Bottomless Fascination. What more is there to say.

Happy 2013.

Even Short of Fiscal Cliff, U.S. Economy Expected to Be Affected

Experts Forecast the Cost of Failure to Compromise

Even if President Obama and Republicans in Congress can reach a last-minute compromise that averts some tax increases before Monday's midnight deadline, experts still foresee a significant drag on the economy in the first half of 2013 from the fiscal impasse in Washington.

Shoppers in Atlanta. The confidence of consumers has eroded in the absence of a deal to avert a harsh budget package on Jan. 1.

While negotiators in the capital focus on keeping Bush-era tax rates in place for all but the wealthiest Americans, other tax increases are expected to go into effect regardless of what happens in the coming days. For example, a two percentage point jump in payroll taxes for Social Security is all but certain after Jan. 1, a change that will equal an additional $2,000 from the paycheck of a worker earning $100,000 a year.

Many observers initially expected the lower payroll-tax deduction rate of 4.2 percent to be preserved. But in recent weeks, as it became clear that political leaders were prepared to let that rate rise to 6.2 percent, economists reduced their predictions for growth in the first quarter accordingly.

Largely because of this jump in payroll taxes, Nigel Gault, chief United States economist at IHS Global Insight, is halving his prediction for economic growth in the first quarter to 1 percent from an earlier estimate of just over 2 percent. That represents a significant slowdown in economic growth from the third quarter of 2012, when the economy expanded at an annual rate of 3.1 percent.

Mr. Obama has pushed to preserve Bush-era tax rates on income below $250,000 a year but Republicans have held out for a higher threshold, perhaps in the neighborhood of $400,000 a year. Republicans also favor deeper spending cuts to curb long-term budget deficits - a move many Democrats oppose.

While hopes dimmed Sunday afternoon that a deal could be reached before Jan. 1, most observers said they did not expect the full impact from more than $600 billion in potential tax increases and spending cuts to swamp the economy right away. Indeed, a compromise could be struck in the coming weeks that heads off the worst of the fallout.

In the event no compromise is found, however, the Congressional Budget Office and many private economists warn that the sudden pullback in spending and the rise in taxes would push the economy into recession in the first half of the year. Under this outcome, Mr. Gault said, the economy could shrink by 0.5 percent over all of 2013.

With the clock ticking, some observers bolstered their criticism of Washington. “If we have a recession, it's unforgivable,” said Bernard Baumohl, chief global economist at the Economic Outlook Group. “For the first time in modern history, we will have a self-inflicted recession in the U.S.”

Despite Washington's history of delaying fiscal compromises to the last possible minute - as in the fight over raising the debt ceiling in the summer of 2011 - investors had assumed until very recently that a deal would be completed before year-end.

But last week, stocks sold off as hopes for a quick compromise faded. More pressure on shares is expected beginning on Monday, especially if the fight does indeed slip into 2013. If anything forces politicians to act, Mr. Baumohl said, it could be a sell-off on Wall Street. “The politicians need to be pressed by markets to be forced to the table,” he said.

Payroll managers at many companies are also watching the negotiations closely but have already prepared systems for the two percentage point change in payroll taxes, said Scott A. Schapiro, a principal at KPMG.

“We're primarily closed down from Christmas to New Year's,” he said, “but our payroll folks are working. Payroll has to be around.”

“This is one of the most obvious effects of the fiscal cliff,” Mr. Schapiro added, “because it will affect all taxpayers.” The Social Security payroll tax applies to the first $113,700 of annual income, he said. It was first cut by Congress in late 2010 to help give the economy a jolt, and was extended again last year to cover 2012.

Another big question mark is whether unemployment benefits for more than two million jobless Americans will be extended beyond Jan. 1. While there is still the possibility these payouts for the long-term unemployed will be preserved as the negotiations go down to the wire, failure to extend them would deliver another sizable blow to a still-fragile economy, experts said.

“This is not just an inside-the-Beltway-game,” said Vincent Reinhart, chief United States economist at Morgan Stanley. “Both the payroll tax increase and the change in unemployment benefits would hit hand-to-mouth consumers hard. This has consequences for the whole economy.”

Consumer spending is especially critical right now, because many businesses have pulled back already, citing the fiscal impasse in Washington as a prime concern. Until recently, consumers have been more optimistic about the economy, although sentiment has eroded in recent weeks as anxiety increased about just what policy makers would do in terms of taxes and spending.

If it were not for the uncertainty in Washington and the fallout from the fiscal impasse, Mr. Reinhart said, the economy would be growing at an annual rate of 2 percent to 2.5 percent. Instead, he estimated growth in the fourth quarter of 2012 at just under 1 percent, and said he expected it to edge up only slightly to around 1 percent in the first half of 2013. Unemployment, now at 7.7 percent, is about 0.3 percentage point higher than it otherwise would be, he added.

To be sure, the impact from some other scheduled changes will not be felt right away - and could still be reversed if a deal is completed in the coming weeks. For example, automatic spending cuts set to hit the Pentagon budget as well as nonmilitary programs are spread out between now and the end of the 2013 fiscal year in September, giving legislators time to change course and head off any major impact.

But the longer the standoff continues, the deeper the economic damage, experts said. “Because the politicians couldn't get out of the way,” Mr. Reinhart said, “growth in the last quarter of 2012 and the first two quarters of 2013 will be below trend. There is a real cost of not coming to the table.”

A version of this article appeared in print on December 31, 2012, on page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: Experts Forecast the Cost Of Failure to Compromise.

Will Turkey Squander Its Opportunity to Lead?

Instead of Turkey leading the post-Arab Spring Middle East, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is setting a new standard of intolerance. Fourteen months after he touted Turkey as an example for the region, Mr. Erdogan is polarizing politics in his country and squelching dissent.

Turkey is, at last, in a unique and enviable position on the world stage: sitting astride Europe, Asia and the Middle East, culturally as well as politically, and relatively strong economically. As post-Mubarak Egypt grapples with old demons in new forms, Syria approaches a bloody denouement and Saudi Arabia and Iran offer little in the way of viable paths to progress, this could be Turkey's moment.

However, experts and human rights groups say leaders in the region need to tolerate more dissent, not less. And Turkey appears to be heading in the wrong direction.

Mor e than 10,000 members of Turkey's Kurdish minority â€" who account for 18 percent of the country's population â€" languish in the country's jails on various terrorism charges. And Turkey now has more journalists in jail â€' 49 â€' than any other nation, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. That is more than Iran, which has jailed 45, or China, which has imprisoned 32.

On Dec.7th, Mr. Erdogan threatened the makers of Turkey's most popular soap opera - “Magnificent Century” -  for the second time in a month. He complained that the series, which exaggerates the palace intrigue, romance, and sex life of Suleiman the Magnificent, a revered 16th century Ottoman leader, was historically inaccurate and called for the series creators to be “taught a lesson.”

More alarmingl y, the daily Hurriyet reported that the ruling party is laying the groundwork for a new law that “aims to forbid humiliation of historical figures or perversion of real facts.” As Dan Bilefsky reported here, the new law would apply to works of fiction as well.

Culture wars, of course, are fought in every country. And the portrayal of revered historical figures, from Abraham Lincoln to Suleiman the Magnificent, can spark angry debate. But what is so troubling about Mr. Erdogan's behavior is the heedless example it sets at a vital time in the region - and the world.

To be fair, Turkey endured decades of Western-backed military rule and is a re latively new democracy. The Kurdish insurgency has claimed 40,000 lives since 1984. And other nations transitioning to democracy - or facing insurgencies - have struggled with dissent, with leaders seeing dissent as disloyal rather than legitimate.

Tom Carothers, an expert in transitions to democracy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said some countries, such as Brazil, Ghana and Mongolia, have welcomed a shift to bracing debate. But others, particularly countries with no history of strong opposition parties, struggle to accept it. In the end, according to Mr. Carothers, it often comes down to the disposition of individual leaders.

“Putin can't stand dissent,” he said, referring to the Russian leader. “Yeltsin could.”

While Mr. Erdogan's actions rankle Turks, the stakes are far higher in Egypt, where Mr. Erdogan has some sway and vital precedents are being set. So far, in terms of the news media, Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi is proving more tolerant of dissent in some ways than his Turkish counterpart.

While Mr. Morsi's rushed Constitution has created deep division, he has generally allowed open political debate and a basic level of press freedom in Egypt. Since the dispute over the country's Constitution began, Mr. Morsi's opponents have freely and fiercely criticized him in the Egyptian media.

On the other hand, as Nathan Brown, a professor at George Washington University and an Egypt expert, says, Mr. Morsi's supporters have savagely beaten his opponents in the streets.

“In Egypt, the rules of political discourse and contestation are unclear and contested,” Mr. Brown said in an email exchange. “Where shrill speech ends and seditious speech begins is being worked out in practice - and in very harsh practice.”

Experts on Turkey say that Mr. Erdogan's tone and tactics are lamentable because they are unnecessary. He remains genuinely popular in the country and is lik ely to be elected president when his second - and he says final - term as prime minister ends in 2015. Instead of keeping a promise to try to resolve the country's Kurdish insurgency, he is sowing division over social issues.

In June, he sparked a furor when he called abortion “murder,” reigniting a debate that has largely quieted since abortion was legalized in Turkey in 1983. Last month, he called for the re-imposition of the death penalty, which his own government banned in 2004. The comment sparked tension with jailed Kurds, in particular, who could potentially face the death penalty.

All the while, the Obama administration continues to support Mr. Erdogan, according to Turkish analysts.

While human rights and press freedom groups question whether Mr. Erdogan's Turkey is, in fact, a model for the region, the United States remains silent.

“I was in Washington last week and no one gives a damn about whether or not the quality of Turkish democracy has declined,” Soli Ozel, a professor of international affairs at Kadir Has University in Istanbul, said in a telephone interview. “So long as it does not hurt essential American interests - and I don't think it will - nobody is going to talk about it.”

David Rohde is a columnist for Reuters, former reporter for The New York Times and two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize. His forthcoming book, “Beyond War: Reimagining American Influence in a New Middle East” will be published in March 2013.

Republicans Consider Changing Electoral Vote Counting to Improve Presidential Odds

WASHINGTON - Not too long ago, political analysts assumed the Republicans had a clear advantage in the Electoral College, the system according to which each state, based on population, is given electors that in almost all cases are awarded on a winner-take-all basis, determining who will be the president of the United States. Today, it's the Democrats who have the edge.

Start by looking at the past seven presidential elections, three won by Republicans, four by Democrats. Then put most states that went for one party in five of these seven elections into the red column for Republican, blue for Democrat and purple or toss-up for the others.

Three are caveats: North Carolina and Virginia voted Republican until recently; the trends, however, are so pronounced that they are more purple than red. Conversely, West Virginia voted Democratic in three of these contests, but has moved safely into the red ranks.

BLUE: The District of Columbia and 20 states, main ly on the coasts and in the progressive upper Midwest, with 256 electoral votes, are the Democrats' base.

RED: 23 states, with 188 electoral votes, including much of the South, the Plains and Rocky Mountains states, are reliably Republican.

There are seven purple states - Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire - with 94 electoral votes.

The upshot: In any normal election cycle, the Republicans have to win Florida and Ohio and at least three of the other five. Or they have to turn around some blue states, such as Pennsylvania and Iowa.

In the my latest Left From Washington, I write about how some Republicans
in states where Republicans control the state government are considering changing how those states assign their electoral votes, instead of the winner-take-all system used in most states, they would emulate Maine and Nebraska, where some of the state's electoral votes are awarded based on which presidenti al candidate carried a district.

As I write:

They see a possible test case in Pennsylvania, where Mr. Obama won the popular vote by more than five percentage points, rolling up huge margins in Philadelphia and its suburbs and in Pittsburgh. Mr. Romney, however, carried 13 of the 18 congressional districts. If this new system were in effect, the Republicans would have gotten 13 of the state's 20 electoral votes while getting trounced in the popular vote. If this occurred in mainly Republican states, it would erase the Democrats' Electoral College advantage.

Politics do shift. In 1988, the Republicans won California, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Connecticut, Maryland and Vermont; all now are considered safely part of the blue base.