16 Jul 2016

Alexander Rave Foundation International Scholarship for People in Arts – Germany

Brief description: The Alexander Rave  Foundation in Germany is awarding scholarships to young art workers and artists from developing countries. The scholarship will convey candidates to and from their home to undergo training in museum or gallery management.
Application Deadline: 15th May, 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Developing countries
To be taken at (country): Germany
Eligible Fields: 
  • curators
  • restorers
  • museum technicians
  • cultural managers
About the Award: Rave Scholarships support further practical training for young curators, restorers, museum technicians and cultural managers from countries in transition and developing countries who have arranged a guest period, a practical training or non-paid work at a museum, at a non-commercial gallery or at a non-commercial cultural institution in Germany.
The Rave Foundation is an independent charitable foundation administered by the ifa (Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen). Ifa is a mediating organization for German foreign cultural policy.
Type: Contest
Eligibility: Scholarships will be awarded to candidates:
  • who come from a transformation or developing country and are still living there,
  • who did not have the opportunity yet to come for a longer stay or did not have further training or working stay in Germany,
  • who finished their professional training not longer than five years ago and are not yet over 40. Those still studying or training at the time of application will not be considered for selection,
  • who have found a non-commercial partner institution in Germany that has agreed to take care of them or agreed to a joint project,
  • who can provide a positive statement from their own country (reference),
  • Knowledge of one of the three languages German, English or French is a requirement.
Applicants who were rejected once cannot apply again.
Selection Process: The Rave Foundation committee will assess all applications. There is no legal claim to the award of a scholarship. The decision will be conveyed to the applicant in writing without stating reasons. Selections will be made within 3 months.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: 
  • a monthly lump sum of 1,300 €uros
  • travelling expenses (to and from Germany)
  • health insurance
Duration of Scholarship: 3 to 6 months
How to Apply: The application should be accompanied by
  • a fully completed application form,
  • a CV (3 pages max.), including educational qualifications,
  • a project sketch (1 page) developed together with the German institution – informing about tasks and responsibilities of the planned visit to Germany,
  • consent form a non-commercial German institution to care for the applicant during the scholarship period in Germany,
  • a letter of reference from the home country,
  • an abridged report (1 page max.) on the current art scene in the home country
  • a letter of motivation (1 page max.)
Applications are submitted by e-mail or mail to
Rave Foundation
c/o Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen
Charlottenplatz 17
D-70173 Stuttgart
Fax +49.711.2225194
rave-stiftung(at)ifa.de
Award Provider: ifa (Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen)

Death Of A Nation?

Linh Dinh

A hundred-and-fifty-one years after the abolition of slavery, America has a half white, half black president, a black Nobelist in literature, whites who attribute not just every form but instance of black dysfunction to white racism, blacks who demand reparations, the mainstreaming of innumerable black slang terms, including “diss,” a new phrase “negro fatigue” and the bumper sticker, “IF I HAD KNOWN THIS, I’D HAVE PICKED MY OWN COTTON.”
It has often been stated that slavery is America’s original sin. In 1751, Benjamin Franklin ruminated on its cons and pros:
The Labour of Slaves can never be so cheap here as the Labour of working Men is in Britain. Any one may compute it. Interest of Money is in the Colonies from 6 to 10 per Cent. Slaves one with another cost 30 £. Sterling per Head. Reckon then the Interest of the first Purchase of a Slave, the Insurance or Risque on his Life, his Cloathing and Diet, Expences in his Sickness and Loss of Time, Loss by his Neglect of Business (Neglect is natural to the Man who is not to be benefited by his own Care or Diligence), Expence of a Driver to keep him at Work, and his Pilfering from Time to Time, almost every Slave being by Nature a Thief, and compare the whole Amount with the Wages of a Manufacturer of Iron or Wool in England, you will see that Labour is much cheaper there than it ever can be by Negroes here. Why then will Americans purchase Slaves? Because Slaves may be kept as long as a Man pleases, or has Occasion for their Labour; while hired Men are continually leaving their Master (often in the midst of his Business,) and setting up for themselves.
There are also these drawbacks:
The Negroes brought into the English Sugar Islands, have greatly diminish’d the Whites there; the Poor are by this Means depriv’d of Employment, while a few Families acquire vast Estates; which they spend on Foreign Luxuries, and educating their Children in the Habit of those Luxuries; tile same Income is needed for the Support of one that might have maintain’d 100. The Whites who have Slaves, not labouring, are enfeebled, and therefore not so generally prolific; the Slaves being work’d too hard, and ill fed, their Constitutions are broken, and the Deaths among them are more than the Births; so that a continual Supply is needed from Africa. The Northern Colonies having few Slaves increase in Whites. Slaves also pejorate the Families that use them; the white Children become proud, disgusted with Labour, and being educated in Idleness, are rendered unfit to get a Living by Industry.
Still, it was worth it, and that’s why Franklin kept several slaves himself. In 1759, however, he joined Thomas Bray’s association to support schools for black children, and in 1787, Franklin became president of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage. Franklin died, then, with the hope that blacks would one day be free and equal to whites.
After blacks were freed, they had to compete with poor whites and white immigrants for work. Illiterate, ignorant and dependent after centuries of slavery, American blacks were even worse off than blacks from the West Indies. In Ethnic America, Thomas Sowell explains:
Unlike slaves in the United States, who were issued food rations and were often fed from the common kitchen, West Indian slaves were assigned land and time to raise their own food. They sold surplus food in the market to buy amenities for themselves. In short, West Indian Negroes had centuries of experience in taking care of themselves in a significant part of their lives, even under slavery, as well as experience with buying and selling. Contemporary observers noted that the slaves in the West Indies worked perceptibly more energetically on their plots of ground than on the land they worked for slave owners. They had the kind of incentives and experience common in a market economy but denied American slaves for two centuries.
In 1873, James Shepherd Pike of the New York Tribune wrote an influential series of articles that was later turned into a book, The Prostrate State: South Carolina under Negro Government. While pointing out that the black man “showed great magnanimity and forbearance in not cutting the throats of the masters’ families when he was emancipated,” Pike painted black-run South Carolina as “the most ignorant democracy that mankind ever saw”:
It is barbarism overwhelming civilization by physical force. It is the slave rioting in the halls of his master, and putting that master under his feet.
[…]
The question is often asked if education is not the remedy for the blackness of darkness that prevails in South Carolina. Yes, indeed, if that were possible […] here is a race to be educated in the very elements of manhood. They have to be taught positively and negatively […] They have to be taught not to lie, not to steal, not to be unchaste […] Education, to be what it ought to be with the existing race of negroes in the South, means to educate them out of themselves, means to undo the habits and practices and modes of thoughts and want of thought engendered by centuries of slavery.
In 1888, Walt Whitman didn’t sound any more optimistic:
The nigger, like the Injun, will be eliminated: it is the law of races, history, what-not: always so far inexorable—always to be. Someone proves that a superior grade of rats comes and then all the minor rats are cleared out.
Booker T. Washington, though, certainly believed the black man had a future and, moreover, was a huge asset to the nation. In 1895, Washington appealed to Southern whites to rely on blacks rather than European immigrants:
To those of the white race who look to the incoming of those of foreign birth and strange tongue and habits for the prosperity of the South, were I permitted I would repeat what I say to my own race, ‘Cast down your bucket where you are.’ Cast it down among the eight millions of Negroes whose habits you know, whose fidelity and love you have tested in days when to have proved treacherous meant the ruin of your firesides. Cast down your bucket among these people who have, without strikes and labour wars, tilled your fields, cleared your forests, builded your railroads and cities, and brought forth treasures from the bowels of the earth, and helped make possible this magnificent representation of the progress of the South. Casting down your bucket among my people, helping and encouraging them as you are doing on these grounds, and to education of head, hand, and heart, you will find that they will buy your surplus land, make blossom the waste places in your fields, and run your factories. While doing this, you can be sure in the future, as in the past, that you and your families will be surrounded by the most patient, faithful, law-abiding, and unresentful people that the world has seen. As we have proved our loyalty to you in the past, in nursing your children, watching by the sick-bed of your mothers and fathers, and often following them with tear-dimmed eyes to their graves, so in the future, in our humble way, we shall stand by you with a devotion that no foreigner can approach, ready to lay down our lives, if need be, in defense of yours, interlacing our industrial, commercial, civil, and religious life with yours in a way that shall make the interests of both races one.”
In his 1899 book, The Philadelphia Negroes, W.E.B. DuBois observed:
In the city of Philadelphia the increasing number of bold and daring crimes committed by Negroes in the last ten years has focused the attention of the city on this subject. There is a widespread feeling that something is wrong with a race that is responsible for so much crime, and that strong remedies are called for.
[…]
4 per cent of the population of Philadelphia having Negro blood furnished from 1885 to 1889, 14 per cent of the serious crimes, and from 1890 to 1895, 22 1/2 per cent.
[…]
we may conclude that young men are the perpetrators of the serious crime among Negroes; that this crime consists mainly of stealing and assault; that ignorance, and immigration to the temptations of city life, are responsible for much of this crime but not for all; that deep social causes underlie this prevalence of crime and they have so worked as to form among Negroes since 1864 a distinct class of habitual criminals; that to this criminal class and not to the great mass of Negroes the bulk of the serious crime perpetrated by this race should be charged.
[…]
His strange social environment must have immense effect on his thought and life, his work and crime, his wealth and pauperism. That this environment differs and differs broadly from the environment of his fellows, we all know, but we do not know just how it differs. The real foundation of the difference is the wide-spread feeling all over the land, in Philadelphia as well as in Boston and New Orleans, that the Negro is something less than an American and ought not to be much more than what he is. Argue as we may for or against this idea, we must as students recognize its presence and its vast effects.
I dug up some old observations so we can see how far, or how little, we’ve gone as a nation. During the decade ending in 1895, Philadelphia had nine murders. Nine in ten years!
With just 50% more people, Philly already has 135 murders this year as of July 14th. Making up 43.3% of its population (according to the 2010 census), blacks commit more than 80% of Philly’s murders, year in and year out. What would DuBois make of this outrage?
Booker T. Washington hoped for “a new heaven and a new earth” predicated on “material prosperity” and “a blotting out of sectional differences and racial animosities and suspicions, in a determination to administer absolute justice, in a willing obedience among all classes to the mandates of law.”
I don’t see it coming. After a week of black attacks against the police in Texas, Tennessee, Minnesota, Missouri, Indiana and Washington DC, there will be Day of Rage protests in 37 American cities today, in support of Black Lives Matter, and next week, dozens of gun-toting New Black Panthers will descend on Cleveland to raise hell at the Republican National Convention.
To close, I will quote at length from a July 9th FaceBook post by Jay Stalien, a Baltimore cop:
I have come to realize something that is still hard for me to understand to this day. The following may be a shock to some coming from an African American, but the mere fact that it may be shocking to some is prima facie evidence of the sad state of affairs that we are in as Humans.
I used to be so torn inside growing up. Here I am, a young African-American born and raised in Brooklyn, NY wanting to be a cop. I watched and lived through the crime that took place in the hood. My own black people killing others over nothing. Crack heads and heroin addicts lined the lobby of my building as I shuffled around them to make my way to our 1 bedroom apartment with 6 of us living inside. I used to be woken up in the middle of the night by the sound of gun fire, only to look outside and see that it was 2 African Americans shooting at each other.
It never sat right with me. I wanted to help my community and stop watching the blood of African Americans spilled on the street at the hands of a fellow black man. I became a cop because black lives in my community, along with ALL lives, mattered to me, and wanted to help stop the bloodshed.
As time went by in my law enforcement career, I quickly began to realize something. I remember the countless times I stood 2 inches from a young black man, around my age, laying on his back, gasping for air as blood filled his lungs. I remember them bleeding profusely with the unforgettable smell of deoxygenated dark red blood in the air, as it leaked from the bullet holes in his body on to the hot sidewalk on a summer day. I remember the countless family members who attacked me, spit on me, cursed me out, as I put up crime scene tape to cordon off the crime scene, yelling and screaming out of pain and anger at the sight of their loved ones taking their last breath. I never took it personally, I knew they were hurting. I remember the countless times I had to order new uniforms, because the ones I had on, were bloody from the blood of another black victim…of black on black crime. I remember the countless times I got back in my patrol car, distraught after having watched another black male die in front me, having to start my preliminary report something like this:
Suspect- Black/ Male, Victim-Black /Male.
I remember the countless times I canvassed the area afterwards, and asked everyone “did you see who did it”, and the popular response from the very same family members was always, “Fuck the Police, I ain’t no snitch, Im gonna take care of this myself”. This happened every single time, every single homicide, black on black, and then my realization became clearer.
I woke up every morning, put my freshly pressed uniform on, shined my badge, functioned checked my weapon, kissed my wife and kid, and waited for my wife to say the same thing she always does before I leave, “Make sure you come back home to us”. I always replied, “I will”, but the truth was I was never sure if I would. I almost lost my life on this job, and every call, every stop, every moment that I had this uniform on, was another possibility for me to almost lose my life again. I was a target in the very community I swore to protect, the very community I wanted to help. As a matter of fact, they hated my very presence. They called me “Uncle Tom”, and “wanna be white boy”, and I couldn’t understand why. My own fellow black men and women attacking me, wishing for my death, wishing for the death of my family. I was so confused, so torn, I couldn’t understand why my own black people would turn against me, when every time they called …I was there. Every time someone died….I was there. Every time they were going through one of the worst moments in their lives…I was there. So why was I the enemy? I dove deep into that question…Why was I the enemy? Then my realization became clearer.
I spoke to members of the community and listened to some of the complaints as to why they hated cops. I then did research on the facts. I also presented facts to these members of the community, and listened to their complaints in response. This is what I learned:
Complaint: Police always targeting us, they always messing with the black man.
Fact: A city where the majority of citizens are black (Baltimore for example) …will ALWAYS have a higher rate of black people getting arrested, it will ALWAYS have a higher rate of blacks getting stopped, and will ALWAYS have a higher rate of blacks getting killed, and the reason why is because a city with those characteristics will ALWAYS have a higher rate of blacks committing crime. The statistics will follow the same trend for Asians if you go to China, for Hispanics if you go to Puerto Rico, for whites if you go to Russia, and the list goes on. It’s called Demographics
Complaint: More black people get arrested than white boys.
Fact: Black People commit a grossly disproportionate amount of crime. Data from the FBI shows that Nationwide, Blacks committed 5,173 homicides in 2014, whites committed 4,367. Chicago’s death toll is almost equal to that of both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, combined. Chicago’s death toll from 2001–November, 26 2015 stands at 7,401. The combined total deaths during Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003-2015: 4,815) and Operation Enduring Freedom/Afghanistan (2001-2015: 3,506), total 8,321.
Complaint: Blacks are the only ones getting killed by police, or they are killed more.
Fact: As of July 2016, the breakdown of the number of US Citizens killed by Police this year is, 238 White people killed, 123 Black people killed, 79 Hispanics, 69 other/or unknown race.
Fact: Black people kill more other blacks than Police do, and there are only protest and outrage when a cop kills a black man. University of Toledo criminologist Dr. Richard R. Johnson examined the latest crime data from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports and Centers for Disease Control and found that an average of 4,472 black men were killed by other black men annually between Jan. 1, 2009, and Dec. 31, 2012. Professor Johnson’s research further concluded that 112 black men died from both justified and unjustified police-involved killings annually during this same period.
Complaint: Well we already doing a good job of killing ourselves, we don’t need the Police to do it. Besides they should know better.

Military Coups, Turkey And flimsy Democracy

Binoy Kampmark

“A minority within the armed forces has unfortunately been unable to stomach Turkey’s unity.”- President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Jul 15, 2016
Any aspect of instability in the state of Turkey is going to be greeted with trepidation by those partners who bank on its security role between East and West. The European Union, that rattled club of members who fear the next onslaught against its institutional credibility, have been bolstering Ankara in the hope to keep refugees at bay.  There are security exchanges, and promises (always promises) of sweeter deals regarding the movement of Turkish citizens.
A cynic versed in the darker side of such instability would also suggest that a Turkey too stable and hungry for external releases of meddlesome power is hardly in a good way either.  The Erdoğan regime has been prone to lashing out with acts of concerted violence, be it against Kurdish rebels or selected anti-Assad forces in Syria.  For its role in backing the Western coalition against the Islamic State, albeit erratically, Turkish citizens have also paid a high price.
Such posturing has to have the imprimatur of the military.  And they don’t always like it.  In its short history, the Republic of Turkey has seen military interference in the political process, a constitutional door that opens in times of crisis. While military matters may not be best vested with military men, the suggestion has often been that politics is sometimes best left to the military.  The result is that the cat is left guarding the cream.
Several civilian heads have rolled because of that contrivance.  In 1960, Adnan Menderes got his marching orders.  As Time Magazine noted, “The Turkish army has long scrupulously observed the admonition of the late great Kemal Atatürk that the army should stay out of partisan politics.  But it also remembered that Atatürk charged it with guarding the constitution.”
The style of Menderes is worth recounting, offering an assortment of parallels to the current Turkish leadership.  Like President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, he courted the rural populations and was rewarded. Like Erdoğan, he supped from the cup of autocracy, irritating cosmopolitan intellectuals and worrying the military in the wings, ever keen to safeguard Kemalist ideals.
Press censorship became one of Menderes’ favourite weapons, while journalists were jailed on flimsy grounds.  Despite an ailing economy and a taste for state funds, he managed to win at the ballot box.  That outcome was insufficient to curry favour with the suspicious military men, who stepped in on May 27, 1960 to arrest the leader along with hundreds of Democrat Party leaders.  For the next 11 months, the Republic was subjected to a trial with a foregone conclusion: a death sentence that Menderes attempted, and failed, to avert.
Hailed as a saving move for democracy, backers of General Cemal Gürsel were sufficiently conned into thinking that a man named President, Premier and Defence Minister would be its saving grace. The National Unity Committee, as it was termed, got busy not merely casting the DP into political and legislative oblivion, but purging the military’s own ranks.  As a result, 5000 officers were dismissed or forcibly retired; lands from wealthy landowners in eastern Anatolia confiscated and 147 university teachers left without jobs.
Other coups followed.  The “coup by memorandum” in 1971, delivered via radio by a newscaster, revealed how the government had again erred, pushing “our country into anarchy, fratricide and social and economic unrest.”  In 1980, the story repeated itself, with the military sages assuming control over chaos.
On Friday, that internal instability manifested itself when Turkish personnel blocked bridges over the Bosphorus strait in Istanbul.  Low flying jets and helicopters were to be seeing flying over Ankara.  Tanks were also witnessed at the main airport.
Where was Erdoğan?  Rumours were spun that he was on his way to Germany, seeking asylum. Such a suggestion supposedly stemmed from US military sources via NBC News. Having been denied landing rights at Istanbul’s airport, the presidential jet veered to Germany, where NBC suggested he had been refused a request for asylum.
Erdoğan did not waste time finding a presumptive architect in the business, conveying his message via iPhone.  Using Facetime, he addressed the Turkish population with his usual non-conciliatory flavour, vowing to eliminate any vestige opposition.  “This country can’t be managed from Pennsylvania,” he remarked, pointedly referring to the US-based imam Fethullah Gülen.
On finally making his way back to Atatürk Airport, the president addressed the crowd with various promises of zealous retribution.  “This attempted uprising will get its answer from the law and they will be given an answer in the judicial system.  They should know that in this country the law will be maintained.”  Curiously enough, the sort of language previously used by the Generals when the Kemalist sword starts to rust.
The coup will be a perfect opportunity for Erdoğan to cleanse the now cluttered stables.  Its failure will permit him a moment of self-satisfied reflection while speaking about that fragile, if not fictional beast called national unity.  The generals will continue to wonder, and wait.  “Everyone,” lamented the architect of the 1980 coup, General Kenan Evren, “speaks of national unity, but unfortunately everyone fails to bring it about.”

Jerusalem: City Of Fear

Jalal Abukhater


A few days ago, I was driving through Qalandiya checkpoint for the first time since I came back to Jerusalem.
My dad, sitting next to me, had to yell “stop here!” at me as I was queuing behind a car at the checkpoint.
“You’re too close,” he said, “stop and wait for them to call you, otherwise they’ll shoot you and not even care.”When I left here to begin my life as a university student four years ago, and despite my sense of general optimism, I never really believed that I would come back to a better and more hopeful Jerusalem.
Over the four years, I would come back during the summer and end up leaving again with a strong belief that things would only be worse the next time I’d be home.
Here I am now, four summers later, having earned my degree, and I believe Jerusalem is worse than it has ever been for its non-Jewish inhabitants, the Palestinians.
Despite this depressing assessment, I have been looking forward to come back to Jerusalem as it is not only the city that I grew up in, but it is the place where I want to embark on the journey of being a young adult.
Fear everywhere
Two years ago, I wrote about the pervasive fear we Jerusalemites feel in our own city.
Today, sadly, this fear is even more intense and tangible. It is not just fanatics or nationalist mobs that worry me, it is every armed Israeli – citizen, police and military – who could end my or anyone else’s life in a second for no reason and without anyone batting an eye.
Since last summer, the ugliness of life in Jerusalem has come to show.
Hundreds of Palestinians of all ages have been harassed, brutalized, arrested, shot or killed.
This is in a city where Israel’s slow, steady but systematic discrimination is forcing Palestinian children out of schools and Palestinian families out of their homes.
In April, Maram Salih Hassan Abu Ismail, a 23-year-old mother of two small children, reportedly five months pregnant, and her 16-year-old brother Ibrahim Salih Hassan Taha, were gunned down by Israeli personnel at the same Qalandiya checkpoint, in the occupied West Bank, north of Jerusalem.
Israel claimed the pair were killed during an attempted knife attack on soldiers, but eyewitnesses described an execution of two people who didn’t understand commands being shouted at them in Hebrew and presented no threat to anyone.
The private firm contracted by the Israelis to man the checkpoint carried out an “internal investigation” and absolved itself of any wrongdoing.
The siblings were among more than 220 Palestinians, as well as more than 30 Israelis and two Americans, who have died since a new phase of violence began last October.
And according to Israel’s B’Tselem human rights group, Maram and Ismail were among dozens of Palestinians killed when they posed no threat in slayings “tantamount to executions.”
Driving while Palestinian
On the day I drove through Qalandiya, I recall my dad reminding me repeatedly how I should be extra careful how I am perceived by Israelis while on the road as anything they deem suspicious could have fatal consequences.
It has become standard in recent months for Israelis to judge any driving irregularities or accidents to be deliberate vehicular attacks, prompting Israelis to attack the driver and ask questions later.
Last month, an Israeli driver plowed his car into a Tel Aviv restaurant, killing two people, before a mob pulled him from the car and beat him believing him to be a Palestinian attacker.
But the man had suffered a heart attack. He died, though it was unclear whether it was due to the beating or the heart attack.
Sometimes just driving around puts your life at risk. On Wednesday, three young men in al-Ram came under a hail of bullets from Israeli forces raiding the village north of Jerusalem. One, Anwar al-Salaymeh, 22, was killed. Another was critically injured and the third detained.
An Israeli spokesperson told the Ma’an News Agency that the soldiers “saw a speeding vehicle heading towards them” and opened fire.
An autopsy was ordered for al-Salaymeh, after it was discovered that he was shot in the back three times, challenging the Israeli narrative.
And during Ramadan, 15-year-old Mahmoud Badran was killed when Israeli soldiers fired on the car he and friends were riding in on their way home from a late-night pool party. In that case, Israel admitted the car was “mistakenly hit.”
Merely walking around in Jerusalem’s Old City for the first time this summer was an uneasy experience.
Anything deemed provocative by the pervasive Israeli police could have costly consequences. It is an environment of fear designed to make us Jerusalemites feel uncomfortable and unwelcome in our own city.
First resort
The killing of Fadi Alloun last October, and other instances of Israeli police shooting Palestinians as mobs cheered them on, are memories we cannot shake and reminders of the precarious nature of our continued existence in this place.
Newly revealed documents show that Israeli police have been authorized to use lethal force as a first resort against any Palestinian seen to throw stones or firecrackers.
For years, Israel claimed that lethal force was only a last resort – even though in practice Israeli forces killed frequently, without provocation and with total impunity.
But you would never see similar measures taken against Jewish stone throwers or attackers who harass Palestinians regularly across the West Bank. Instead, the attackers habitually enjoy army protection.
Every few days I wake up to news of Palestinians being shot for acting “suspiciously” or allegedly possessing a knife. In all these cases, Israel is judge, jury and, often, executioner, with no credible justice system in place to independently investigate such claims or killings.
I still remember a few years back when a man in front of me at Qalandiya checkpoint was kicked by soldiers, humiliated and reduced to tears as he was denied passage through the checkpoint.
He had been carrying a bag full of cooking equipment and chefs knives and he had multiple papers showing he was part of a culinary school in Jerusalem.
Today, a person in a similar situation would have been killed and no one would question it as the mere possession of a knife has become enough of an excuse legitimizing the summary execution of Palestinians.
Still standing
An internal police report exposed by the Tel Aviv newspaper Haaretz this week, revealed, to no surprise of any Jerusalemite, that Israeli Border Police in Jerusalem “deliberately provoke Palestinians” in order to get a violent response.
One such manufactured provocation in Issawiyeh, in January, led to a confrontation in which Israeli forces shot 12-year-old Ahmad Abu Hummus in the head, causing severe brain damage.
Social media is never lacking in daily videos documenting the regular harassment, searches and humiliation of Palestinian youths in Jerusalem that lead to similar violence.
It is weird living in Jerusalem right now, especially knowing that this situation only strengthens my determination to stay here, live here and fight for this city.
I know too that if I wanted to write about all the forms of abuse against Palestinians in Jerusalem, I would be writing endlessly for days.
It is a situation where the power and might of the whole Israeli state is determined to alienate Palestinian Jerusalemites. However, this cruelty and injustice only breeds further resistance and defiance.
They may deem our lives worthless, our dignity of no value, our existence an inconvenience, but I believe Jerusalem continues to stand tall and defy the oppression no matter how dark the times have become.

BRICS And Civil Society

Pradeep Baisakh

India is going to host the 8th BRICS Summit in Goa on October 15-16, 2016 as part of India’s chairmanship of BRICS this year. BRICS is the acronyms of its member nations: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, all of which are fast growing developing economies. The formation came to existence in 2009 but South Africa was taken as member in 2010. In BRICS summits, the heads of state or heads of government e.g. Presidents and Prime Ministers of the partner countries participate.
How important is BRICS for India? In the 7th summit of BRICS in Ufa, Russia last year, Prime Minister Modi announced his 10-point programme on future engagement of BRICS nations. This year in March the External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj narrated the core theme for the Chairmanship as “Building Responsive, Inclusive and Collective Solutions (BRICS)”. It’s going to organize more than 50 sectorial meetings at the ministerial, official, technical, and track II levels. Among them are BRICS Film Festival, BRICS Youth Forum, Young Diplomat’s Forum, BRICS Trade Fair, Think-Tank and Academic Forums etc. This signifies how engrossed is India in BRICS process and sees value in the formation.
India’s focus will be five prong: institution building, implementation, integration, innovation, and continuity with consolidation, I4C, in short.
BRICS initiated New Development Bank (NDB) has already come into existence and started operating. It is widely believed that the NDB has been visualized in response to the hegemony of west, particularly United Statesover the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank (WB)and answer to the growing discontent of the developing countries against these institutions. NDB has been instituted “with the objective of funding infrastructure projects in the developing countries and meet the aspirations of millions through sustainable development.” The bank will have initial authorized capital of $100 billion.
Why civil society intervention? 
Despite the economic slowdown witnessed in some member-states, the formation assumes a lot of significance to its members. With the functioning of NDB, the possible impact of the bloc on its member-states is likely to increase.
The five countries together account for 43 percent of the world’s population, 46 percent of the global labour force, 30 percent of the earth’s landmass and 25 percent of the world’s share of global gross domestic product (GDP) and more importantly almost 50 percent of world’s poor live in BRICS countries.
Given the vastness of the bloc in terms of population and poverty, the civil society feels it appropriate to engage with the formation to influence its agenda. Civil society’s interest is to see that the agenda of BRICS is inclusive of the interest of the poorer and excluded sections in each of its member counties. In the backdrop of jobless growth, and the pattern growth that has led to rising inequality; civil society wants to ensure that the growth visualized by BRICS is sustainable and reckons with the adverse impact of economic growth on environment. It also is anxious to see that the NDB does not end up becoming another international financial institutions (Read IMF and WB), whose role toward the developing countries and the LDCs, so also for the larger benefit of the people has been questioned. It should ensure that the bank invents not only in infrastructure development but also in building social capital.
Engagement of civil society with BRICS 
The first formal engagement of BRICS bloc with the civil society, termed as Civil BRICS, took place in Ufa, Russia during the 7th BRICS Summit. The meeting discussed about the necessity of dialogue of the civil society with the decision makers. It discussed on variety of social issues like heath care, equality, conflict management etc.
In 2013,Brazil took the initiative to hold dialogue with the civil society of Brazil for their inputs into BRICS process. This was an independent decision of Brazil. Later however the information and outcome of the meeting with civil society was shared with other BRICS member states. This was followed by the South Africa to hold several regional consultations with the civil society of South Africa in 2014.These interactions led to formalization of process of engagement of BRICS with civil society.
This year FIDC (Forum for India’s Development Cooperation), a think tank of Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) proposes to hold the 2nd Civil BRICS in New Delhi in first week of October. This is a space for interaction with the civil society with agenda like civil society partnership in implementation of SDGs; food security, nutrition and health; inequality, economic growth and job creation; multi-lateral trade and sustainable development and sustainable urbanisation and urban poverty.  This is very good development.
It is also equally heartening that the Ufa declaration of BRICS (declaration on July, 2015 by 7th BRICS summit held in Ufa, Russia) discussed about poverty, income inequality, gender inequality and gaps in international tax regimes as major challenges and reiterates its commitment to act towards them. All these are fulfilling to civil society as these are the agendas which it pushes for.
However, two issues remain. One, if the NDB lives up to its promise towards environmental protections. In the name of funding the mega infrastructure projects it should not destroy environment and undemocratically usurp the land from the tribals and poor. Development has to be democratically accepted and is sustainable to preserve natural resources for the coming generations.
The other concern remains about the “Institutionalisation of Civil BRICS”. Last year in the declaration of the official BRICS, there was only a mention about the interface of civil society. No one knows what happened to the recommendations of the civil society. Amitabh Behar of Wada Na Todo Abhiyan , a conglomeration of civil society in India opines “This year the process interface with the civil society should be institutionalized and the recommendations emerging out of the Civil BRICS should be reflected in the official BRICS process.”
Come October, how seriously outcome of the Civil BRICS meeting is taken by the government, which has a step-sisterly attitude toward NGOs, remains to be seen.

Papua New Guinea government faces strikes, no-confidence motion

John Braddock

Just weeks after suppressing widespread student demonstrations, the Papua New Guinea (PNG) government is confronting strikes and protests and a renewed push by the parliamentary opposition for a vote of no-confidence. Students had been demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Peter O’Neill over corruption allegations.
The Supreme Court this week ordered the reconvening of parliament to consider the no-confidence motion. The opposition parties also obtained a court order forcing the parliamentary speaker to allow time for the motion to be properly considered. Parliament, which met yesterday, has been adjourned for a week until July 22.
O’Neill had previously used his overwhelming majority to adjourn parliament until August 2, thus avoiding a no-confidence motion due to a statutory period of grace prior to elections due next year. The Supreme Court ruled that government attempts to block such a vote were unconstitutional.
“Whatever the reasons are, the fact remains that these rejections are unprecedented and pose a real threat to parliamentary democracy in this country,” the court declared. The judges warned of criminal sanctions if government MPs continued to frustrate attempts to debate the motion.
Cracks in O’Neill’s coalition have begun to appear. Shortly before parliament reconvened, Petroleum and Energy Minister Ben Micah defected to the opposition with five other members of his People’s Progress Party (PPP). The opposition is well short of the 56 voters required to topple the government. However, the ruling coalition is a fragile amalgam of small parties and individuals, and the one-week delay buys time for the opposition to build support.
The no-confidence motion is the opposition’s fourth in the past eight months, in response to a longstanding warrant for O’Neill’s arrest over the alleged corrupt appropriation of about $US22 million of public funds.
Large crowds gathered outside parliament on Friday. Police imposed a lock-down and mobilised a large contingent of armed officers. The National reported that police were also monitoring “threats purportedly issued by some workers’ unions for a nationwide stop work.”
The unrest follows two months of sustained student protests that culminated in the police shooting into a group of protesters at the University of Papua New Guinea (UPNG) campus on June 8. Several were wounded. Efforts to end a boycott of classes failed, forcing the university administration to terminate the academic year on July 5.
While the opposition parties have focussed on O’Neill’s alleged corruption, the political turmoil is symptomatic of a worsening economic and social crisis. The government is under pressure from global financial agencies to devalue the currency and accelerate austerity measures that have already produced widespread popular opposition. The International Monetary Fund has warned the government has sufficient reserves to cover just three months of imports.
Slumping oil and gas prices have led to a collapse of state revenue and the Asian Development Bank forecasts economic growth will slow to 2.4 percent by 2017. The government’s austerity program is more aggressive than that of Greece, slashing expenditure by 13.5 percent, including cuts of more than 40 percent to health and education.
The parliamentary opposition, however, has no fundamental disagreement with the government’s socially regressive agenda. Opposition leader Don Polye was O’Neill’s treasurer until 2014 and played a critical role in cutting social spending and attacking living standards.
An opposition grouping, the Concerned Citizens Coalition (CCC), which includes pilots, aviation workers, lawyers and union officials, is mounting limited protests and strikes. Spokesman and lawyer Moses Murray told Radio New Zealand that its members were spurred into action by the police shootings at UPNG. “The professional working class and the ordinary citizens want to express the brunt of this country’s failing economy being felt by all as a result of the consequences of Peter O’Neil’s tyrant style leadership,” he said.
Murray stressed that the CCC was not calling strikes but for people to not go to work. “It’s not militant in nature, never,” he said. “As I speak to you it’s happening in the three city centres. People are just not going to work, they’re staying home.” A number of pilots have not reported for work since Wednesday, causing flight delays and cancellations at Port Moresby airport. Several government departments have reported minimal disruptions. The trade unions have refused to declare a general strike.
The Doctor’s Association has warned that in response to health budget cuts, doctors and nurses will strike from next week unless O’Neill steps down. The association last month ordered a return to work after more than 20 doctors at Mt Hagen General Hospital, the biggest referral hospital in the Highlands, voted unanimously to resign en masse. Over 200 nurses also walked off the job.
O’Neill has responded to the spreading unrest by ramping up repressive measures. The National Security Advisory Council (NSAC) met this week to determine how to counter strikes and protests. Chief Secretary Isaac Lupari threatened to invoke the Internal Security Act and Essential Services Act. “Politicians, landowners, public, students, landowners and any members of the community who issue threats will be investigated, arrested and prosecuted,” he declared.
The NSAC established a National Security Joint Task Force, including police and military personnel, to “quell increasing internal security threats.” The National Intelligence Organisation will also be involved. Lupari warned that the task force will monitor both social and mainstream media.
The response of Australia, PNG’s former colonial ruler, has been muted to date. An offer of “help” by Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull after the UPNG shootings was firmly rejected by O’Neill. However, the Australian government will be following developments closely. In 2011, Canberra helped oust former Prime Minister Michael Somare, who was regarded as too close to Beijing, and install O’Neill, who took office in 2012.
Following a state visit to Beijing earlier this month, O’Neill expressed his “respect” for China’s position on disputed claims in the South China Sea—a statement that will have raised concerns in Washington and Canberra as they exploit the latest court ruling in The Hague to intensify diplomatic pressure on China.

Indian troops kill dozens of protesters in Kashmir

Kranti Kumara

In an unremitting campaign of mass repression, Indian military and paramilitary forces have repeatedly fired on civilian protesters for the past week in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), the country’s northernmost and only Muslim-majority state.
The official death toll, as of this writing, is 39, with young people between the ages of 16 and 26 accounting for almost all the dead. A further two thousand people have been injured, with some sustaining crippling and even life-threatening injuries.
Despite this savage state violence and the imposition of blanket curfews in many areas, large numbers of Kashmiris have continued to come onto the streets.
This latest bout of anti-Indian government protests erupted in the aftermath of the cornering and killing of Burhan Muzaffar Wani—the 22-year-old commander of the Hizbul Mujahideen (HM), a Kashmiri separatist and Islamist group—by Indian troops Friday, July 8.
Partly as a reaction against decades of state repression and violence, Kashmir has been convulsed for more than a quarter-century by an insurgency mounted by groups calling either for an independent Kashmir or its merger into Pakistan.
The past week of mass protests in Kashmir has rattled India’s government, which is currently led by Narendra Modi and his Hindu supremacist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), as it has once again exposed Kashmiri Muslims’ deep disaffection with the Indian state.
By the beginning of this week, Home Minister Rajnath Singh felt compelled to postpone a visit to the US, while Modi’s National Security Advisor, Ajit Doval, cut short his participation in Modi’s four-country Africa trip to return to New Delhi to “take stock” of the situation.
Pakistan, which has manipulated the Kashmir insurgency as part of its reactionary geo-political conflict with India, has lauded the dead separatist leader as a “freedom fighter,” accused India of state terrorism, and intensified its efforts to “internationalize” its 69 year-long dispute with India over control of Kashmir.
As the fatalities mounted in Jammu and Kashmir this week, Islamabad approached the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and the European Union calling on them to intervene to stop what it cynically termed human rights atrocities in Kashmir.
On Thursday, India’s UN ambassador responded with a blistering denunciation, in which he indicted Pakistan as a state that “uses terrorism as state policy,” “extols the virtues of terrorists,” and “provides sanctuary to U.N.-designated terrorists.”
In a move that will undoubtedly enflame the already fraught relations between the rival nuclear-armed states, Pakistan’s government proclaimed Wani a “martyr” on Friday and announced that the country will observe a “black day over violence in Kashmir” next Tuesday.
Western governments have refrained from criticizing the Indian government’s repression in Kashmir. The Obama administration essentially gave the Modi government a greenlight to continue using lethal force against civilians. On Tuesday, the US State Department publicly declared the disturbances in Kashmir to be “an internal matter of India,” although the Kashmir dispute has officially been before the UN since the late 1940s. Later in the week Washington issued a pro forma call for talks between New Delhi and Islamabad.
The US’s blithe reaction to the state repression in Jammu and Kashmir is a further sign of Washington’s downgrading of its traditional alliance with Pakistan so as to consolidate an Indo-US “global strategic partnership” and integrate India into its anti-China “Pivot to Asia.” Recently, the Modi government finalized an agreement allowing the Pentagon to make routine use of Indian military bases and ports for refuel and resupply.
The Indian government has a long history of using deadly violence against civilians in Jammu and Kashmir. Half-a-million heavily armed Indian troops and para-militaries are currently deployed in the state, which has a population of less than 14 million. Under the “Indian Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act” (AFSPA) they have sweeping police powers and legal immunity from prosecution. Under this blanket legal protection, Indian security forces have committed atrocious crimes with impunity over the past two decades, including summary executions, rape, arbitrary arrests and “disappearances.”
The anger of the Kashmiri population is not just directed at India’s BJP government, but also at J&K Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti, whose People’s Democratic Party (PDP) rules the state in a shaky political alliance with the Hindu-communalist BJP.
A party of Kashmir’s Muslim elite that seeks “self-rule,” the PDP unexpectedly struck a coalition deal with the BJP after state assembly elections in December 2014 produced a highly-fractured result. A traditional also-ran in J&K elections, the BJP made gains in the 2014 assembly elections in Jammu, where the state’s non-Muslim population is concentrated, using rank communal appeals.
It was Mehbooba’s father, PDP-founder Mufti Mohammed Sayeed, who played the chief role in stitching together a marriage of convenience with the BJP. Sayeed justified this alliance by claiming that the BJP had agreed to a “common minimum program” that would bring “peace, prosperity and economic development”. He subsequently became the state’s Chief Minister, only to be replaced by his daughter after his death last December.
Predictably, the promises of peace and economic development have proven hollow. Mass unemployment and poverty remain endemic and the central government and Indian military have refused to repeal or make any substantive changes to the AFSPA.
In the meantime, the Modi government has whipped up anti-Muslim communalism. This has included: venerating the 20th Century Hindutvaideologue V.D. Savarkar, who declared India’s Muslims to be outside the Indian nation; encouraging BJP-led state governments to outlaw beef-eating; and excusing and covering up for anti-Muslim communal violence perpetrated by the BJP’s Hindu nationalist allies.
So deep and widespread is the anger of the Kashmiri masses towards the PDP for its alliance with the BJP that very few people turned up for Sayeed’s funeral.
By contrast, tens of thousands, especially young people, came out on the streets to mourn Wani. Under conditions where there is no progressive opposition to the rule of the Indian bourgeoisie, a section of alienated Kashmiri Muslim youth were attracted by Wani’s daring defiance of the Indian government and its security forces. Wani regularly used social media, including video and Facebook posts, to promote the communalist separatist and pro-Pakistan politics of the Hizbul Mujahideen. Unlike other insurgents, he did not cover his face.
In the days that followed Wani’s funeral, protests engulfed wide parts of J&K including the state’s summer capital, Srinagar, and the Anantnag, Kulgam, Shopian, Pulwama and Doda districts. Angered by the brutality of the security forces, protesters attacked police stations, government offices and other signs of government authority.
Adding insult to injury, the security forces have boasted they are using “non-lethal” or “less-lethal” pellet guns to reduce fatalities. In reality the pellets, which form an explosive spray when fired, are inflicting horrific casualties, with scores suffering wounds to their eyes.
Indian authorities claim Burhan Wani died in a gun battle. But much of the local population believe he was hunted down, captured and then summarily executed, since for decades this has been the standard practice of Indian forces when dealing with Kashmiri separatists.
The horror that is contemporary Kashmir is the outcome of the reactionary 1947 communal partition of South Asia into an explicitly Muslim state of Pakistan and a predominantly Hindu India—a crime carried out jointly by the Indian National Congress of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, the Muslim League, and the subcontinent’s departing British colonial overlords. Partition precipitated mass communal violence in which more than a million people died; resulted in some 14 million people fleeing from one state to the other; institutionalized communalism in South Asia’s state structure, fueling the incendiary strategic rivalry between India and Pakistan that continues to this day; and led, soon after, to the partition of Kashmir into Indian-held Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistani-occupied Azad Kashmir and the enforced division of the Kashmiri people.
Only an independent movement of the Kashmiri working class in an organic political partnership with their class brothers and sisters in India and Pakistan and animated by a socialist perspective can find a way out of the historic impasse created by Partition and seven decades of the reactionary rule of the Indian and Pakistani bourgeoisies.

Japan exploits violence in South Sudan to dispatch military

Ben McGrath

In a test case of Japan’s new military legislation passed last year, Tokyo dispatched its Self-Defense Forces (SDF) to evacuate Japanese aid workers in South Sudan. The newest nation in Africa has been riven by political and military strife since splitting from Sudan in 2011 with the backing of the US and Europe.
On Monday evening, three military C-130 transport planes left the Komaki Air Base in Aichi Prefecture for Japan’s only overseas base, in Djibouti, and arrived late Wednesday. By that time a chartered plane had left South Sudan, evacuating 47 aid workers from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) to Kenya. Another 20 Japanese citizens remained behind. The Defense Ministry said it would assess the situation before deciding whether to send in planes to evacuate the remaining personnel.
There are also 350 Japanese ground troops working ostensibly to aid construction projects as part of the UN Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS). Japan first sent troops in 2012, but their role has continually expanded. In December 2013, Japanese troops provided South Korean soldiers, also part of UNMISS, with 10,000 rounds of ammunition in violation of Japan’s Peacekeeping Operation (PKO) law, which bans providing weaponry to third nations.
Last week fighting broke out in and around the South Sudanese capital of Juba between troops loyal to President Salva Kiir and those backing Vice-President Riek Machar. More than 300 people, including civilians, were killed in the violence before a ceasefire took effect Monday night. According to the UN, 36,000 people have been displaced. The clashes raised fears of a return to the civil war that ravaged the country from December 2013 to August 2015.
During the fighting, two Chinese soldiers, attached to UNMISS, were killed on Sunday evening in a shelling attack while on patrol near a UN compound. A UN source also reported that clashes took place near the Japanese military’s camp, according to the Japan Times. The renewed fighting, particularly with UN troops being drawn into the conflict, is significant. Under Japan’s previous PKO law, SDF soldiers could be deployed only so long as a ceasefire existed between the conflicting sides.
When asked at a press conference on Monday, before the new ceasefire went into effect, whether this was still the case in South Sudan, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga replied: “We don’t consider that any armed conflict as defined by the PKO law has broken out in the operation area of UNMISS.”
While cast simply as a mission to protect Japanese citizens, the situation provides Tokyo with the opportunity to deploy SDF forces under the military legislation passed last September, while simultaneously expanding its operations in South Sudan. Under these new laws, Japanese troops are permitted to take part in battles and accept larger and more aggressive roles, under the guise of a UN peacekeeping operation or in coming to the assistance of an ally—in particular the United States.
At the same time, Suga was reluctant to invoke the new laws on Monday. The government is well aware that, despite its passage, legal scholars have denounced the legislation as unconstitutional. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his ruling Liberal Democratic Party are pushing to revise the constitution to permit the SDF, which would be renamed the National Defense Force, to take part in wars overseas.
The latest deployment follows the killing of seven Japanese JICA aid workers in Dhaka, Bangladesh during an attack on July 2 claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The SDF deployment to Africa is designed to draw the least amount of public objection.
In the past, the Abe government has exploited terrorist attacks or threats to Japanese citizens abroad to further his remilitarization agenda. Following the deaths of 37 hostages, including ten Japanese, in the 2013 hostage situation at In Amenas, Algeria, the prime minister and his cabinet approved a bill, passed in November of that year, allowing the SDF to enter conflict zones, so long as the pretext of a rescue mission existed.
The hostage crisis in early 2015 involving Kenji Goto, a reporter, and Haruna Yukawa, a self-described military contractor, both murdered by ISIS in Syria, was similarly exploited to introduce and promote September’s military legislation. Emboldened by its recent electoral victory in the upper house of Japan’s parliament, the Abe government will rapidly accelerate its remilitarization drive.
JICA’s role is also an important one for Japanese imperialism. The aid agency allows Japan to expand its presence in countries, like South Sudan and Bangladesh, where China is vying for influence. In South Sudan, China’s state-owned National Petroleum Corporation owns a 40 percent stake in a joint venture operating the African nation’s oil fields.
South Sudan was divided from Sudan under the pretext of ending a 22-year civil war. The true purpose of a 2005 peace deal and then the 2011 referendum on independence was to pull Sudan, and more specifically, the vast oil and mineral reserves located in South Sudan, out from under Chinese influence. Japan, no less than the US, is involved in this operation, relying heavily on economic aid to push its agenda against China in Africa. However, Tokyo is no less intent on using its military to achieve its aims.