LISBON, JAN 19 (DNA): Portugal’s socialist candidate won the first round of the presidential election and will face the far-right candidate in the second round, near-complete results showed Sunday.

                  With votes from 95 percent of  constituencies counted, Socialist Antonio Jose Seguro was leading with 30.6 percent of the vote, while far-right contender Andre Ventura came in second with 24.2 percent.

                  The liberal candidate Joao Cotrim Figueiredo was in third place with 15.5 percent.

                  Ventura and Seguro will face off on February 8 to decide who succeeds conservative incumbent Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa.

                  Opinion polls in the run-up to the election had suggested that Ventura was the favourite for the first round.

                  This will nevertheless be the first time a far-right candidate has made it to the second round of the presidential race.

                  During the campaign, Seguro had argued that he was the only one capable of defeating Ventura’s “extremism” and had called on “all democrats” to unite behind him.

                  While the role of president is largely ceremonial, in times of crisis the incumbent can dissolve parliament, call elections or dismiss a prime minister.

                  Portugal’s prime minister, right-winger Luis Montenegro, said he would not be giving any advice on who to vote for in the second round.

                  His minority government already relies on Ventura’s Chega party for support to implement some of its policies.

                  – Ventura ‘confident’ –

                  This is the first time in four decades that no candidate has won outright in the first round by securing more than 50 percent of the vote.

                  Ventura said he felt “very confident” after casting his vote in the sunny capital.

                  “We cannot spend our time criticising things and then sit on the couch on the day we are called to make a decision,” he said.

                  “I believe in the good sense of the Portuguese,” said Ventura after voting in his home city of Caldas da Rainha.

                  As he finished his first-round campaign, he called on other parties on the right not to stand in his way if he makes it to the second round.

                  And in his final election rally he toughened his tone, saying he would refuse to try to please everyone and promising to “put some order” into the country.

                  Voting in Lisbon, Alexandre Leitao, a 50-year-old biologist, said he had voted left wing to stave off the “very negative shift toward the far right”.

                  “We young people are not happy with the country we have,” said 33-year-old Irina Ferestreoaru.

                  She said public approval of Ventura was “a warning sign for the country, because people are desperate to see change”.

                  – Far right shift –

                  Analysts say Ventura has his sights set on eventually running the country as prime minister.

                  “Andre Ventura is running to keep his voter base,” said Antonio Costa Pinto, a political scientist at Lisbon University.

                  Chega’s party emerged as the biggest opposition party in parliament after a general election last May, overtaking the Socialists.

                  “Another solid result for the far right would confirm its domination over the political landscape,” consulting firm Teneo said in a note.

                  EU and eurozone member Portugal accounts for around 1.6 percent of the bloc’s economic output.

Fərid Mustafayev

One of the gravest trials endured by the Azerbaijani people in the twentieth century is associated with the events of the night of January 20. That night was not only remembered for the deployment of military equipment against unarmed civilians.

It entered history as a moment when the patience, will, and historical memory of an entire nation were deliberately targeted. The scale of the events, the nature of the violence employed, and the subsequent information manipulations demonstrated that the objective was not merely physical control, but also the creation of deep moral and psychological shock. Against the backdrop of these complex and contradictory processes, Heydar Aliyev’s position acquired particular significance.

He assessed the events not only in terms of their immediate course, but within a framework of cause-and-effect relationships. For Heydar Aliyev, January 20 was not confined to a single night. It represented the culmination of long-accumulated political contradictions, legal voids, and disregard for national will.

He categorically stated that armed intervention could under no circumstances be presented as a means of ensuring public order, because the concept of public order is founded upon law, security, and human dignity. On the night of January 20, all of these principles were trampled. Heydar Aliyev’s stance was formed precisely on this basis, and he substantiated it both politically and legally. The immediate analytical approach to the events was a clear reflection of Heydar Aliyev’s political mindset.

He did not limit himself to emotional reactions. On the contrary, he emphasized the necessity of a systematic evaluation of what had occurred. For him, the primary issue was not merely naming those responsible, but correctly identifying the essence of the events themselves. Without an accurate diagnosis, no sound conclusion could be reached. In his position addressed to the Soviet political leadership, Heydar Aliyev placed the concept of responsibility at the center. He believed that evading responsibility only aggravated the situation and further eroded trust between society and authority.

Therefore, he demanded that the events receive an objective legal and political assessment. For that period, this demand was not only courageous, but also deeply principled. The impact of the tragedy on individual human lives did not escape Heydar Aliyev’s attention. In his view, those who perished were not statistical figures. Each loss represented a family tragedy, the pain of a generation, and a profound shock to society.

From this perspective, he approached the events not solely through a political lens, but with humane and ethical considerations. This approach played a significant role in society’s acceptance of him as a moral leader. His attention to the families of the victims was a tangible expression of social responsibility. He openly declared that the state is not merely a structure of power institutions; above all, it must be capable of sharing in the suffering of its citizens. This position had a serious influence on shaping the public mood in the aftermath of January 20. In his addresses to the domestic audience, the primary objective was to prevent the deepening of panic and chaos within society.

Heydar Aliyev emphasized a reasoned stance, patience, and the idea of national unity. He understood that emotional fragmentation could lead to long-term consequences. For this reason, he presented national solidarity as a strategic necessity. His appeals to the international community, on the other hand, were aimed at ensuring global recognition of the events. Heydar Aliyev understood that an information vacuum could result in the loss of truth. Therefore, he considered it essential that the realities of January 20 be voiced on the international stage. This was an important step both in terms of political responsibility and the preservation of historical memory. A key element in his speeches was the strengthening of national self-awareness.

For Heydar Aliyev, January 20 was not merely the pain of the past; it was a serious message regarding how the future should be constructed. He believed that the people must draw conclusions from this tragedy and enter a stage of political maturity.

He associated January 20 with the concept of national responsibility. In his view, freedom is not only an aspiration, but also a responsibility—a responsibility borne by both political leaders and society as a whole. This perspective enabled the events to be perceived not merely as an emotional memory, but as a strategic lesson.

His analytical stance played a significant role in the transformation of public consciousness. Heydar Aliyev demonstrated that it is not enough to approach history solely through mourning; history must shape thought. It was precisely this approach that accelerated the understanding of the January 20 events within the context of national identity.

Over time, the historical significance of Heydar Aliyev’s position became increasingly evident. The assessment of the events did not change, but society’s perception of that assessment deepened. His principles evolved into a model of political conduct and, in later periods, became one of the foundational pillars of statehood thinking.

The events of January 20 revealed the unbreakable will of the Azerbaijani people, while Heydar Aliyev’s response to these events became the political expression of that will. His stance proved that national memory can be further strengthened through a leader’s position.Today, when we look back at the January 20 events, it becomes clear that Heydar Aliyev’s position was not merely a historical fact, but also a moral compass. His stance ensured that the events were not forgotten over time, that their essence was not distorted, and that they continued to live on in national memory in an accurate and dignified manner.

Thus, the January 20 tragedy remains in the history of Azerbaijan as both a period of pain and a moment of awakening. Heydar Aliyev’s assessment of this tragedy became one of the key factors defining its political and moral framework. This position played an important guiding role in the historical path of the nation and continues to retain its relevance today.

Fərid Mustafayev
Deputy Chairman of the “Progress” Social and Economic Research Public Union,
Member and activist of the New Azerbaijan Party Yasamal District Organization

MANILA, JAN 19: Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos said Monday that a “significant” discovery of natural gas had been made near the country’s sole producing offshore site.

About 98 billion cubic feet (2.8 billion cubic metres) of natural gas — enough to provide power to 5.7 million homes for a year — has been found east of the Malampaya Field near the island of Palawan, Marcos said.

The Philippines has some of the region’s highest energy costs and faces a looming crisis as the Malampaya gas field, which supplies about 40 percent of power to the archipelago’s main island, Luzon, is expected to run dry within a few years.

The discovery — five kilometres (three miles) east of the Malampaya Field  — is the first in more than a decade and suggested the potential to produce even more, Marcos said.

                  “This helps Malampaya’s contribution and strengthens our domestic gas supply for many years to come. Initial testing showed that the well flowed at 60 million cubic feet per day,” Marcos said in a statement.

                  The Philippines — regularly affected by electricity outages — relies on imported carbon-belching coal for more than half of its power generation.

                  Kairos Dela Cruz, executive director of the Manila-based Institute for Climate and Sustainable Cities, told AFP that while the find was “relatively small”, it could point the way to finding other nearby gas resources.

                  “The discovery of these other gas fields will provide new indigenous supply and increase energy security,” he said.

                  “It also helps extend the operating life of the 500-kilometre undersea gas pipeline, long enough for larger gas fields in the area to be discovered.”

                  A former industry executive who spoke on condition of anonymity estimated the new find could extend the Malampaya Field’s life by two to three years.

                  Long-term, the country will still need to increase its focus on renewables ranging from solar to hydro to offshore wind projects, Dela Cruz said.

                  In 2022, then-president Rodrigo Duterte called a halt to oil and gas exploration in areas of the South China Sea disputed with China.

                  Beijing has ignored a 2016 international tribunal decision that declared its historical claim over most of the South China Sea to be without basis.