10 Feb 2017

French ex-president Sarkozy indicted over 2012 campaign finances

Stéphane Hugues 

Ex-conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy has been ordered to stand trial for “illegal financing of an electoral campaign” in relation with his failed bid for reelection as French President in 2012.
The charges were brought based upon the investigation into the so-called “Bygmalion” scandal. In this scandal, the company of the same name, which had been hired to organize the Sarkozy campaign’s public meetings, was found to have directly billed Sarkozy’s party, the UMP (now known as Les Republicans, LR), some €20 million in the last months of the campaign.
The billing started just after Sarkozy’s election campaign had reached and exceeded its legal limit of €22.5 million. By billing the UMP for imaginary meetings on different topics that were in reality election meetings for Sarkozy’s campaign, it was possible for his campaign to keep €20 million in spending off the Sarkozy campaign’s accounts.
On Tuesday, Sarkozy’s lawyer, Thierry Herzog, initiated moves to quash the indictment, setting into motion legal proceedings that will last months, if not several years, over the charges.
The indictment of Sarkozy is part of the escalating wave of scandals and legal infighting engulfing LR during the campaign for the May 2017 French presidential elections. In November, François Fillon beat the two other leading LR candidates—Sarkozy and ex-Prime Minister Alain Juppé—in the LR primaries, to become the LR candidate.
Three weeks ago, however, the satirical weekly, Le Canard Enchainé, dropped a bombshell, revealing that Fillon had employed his wife and children in no-show jobs. In particular, Fillon’s wife was officially employed for over a decade, grossing nearly one million euros. Fillon’s polling results have dropped from 35 percent to 22 percent, and he is under legal investigation that could result in an indictment for defrauding the French Parliament of the salaries that it paid.
Like Sarkozy’s case and the wave of other multimillion-euro corruption scandals involving LR, the case exposed the class gulf separating bourgeois politicians from the vast majority of the working population, which struggles to get by.
Currently, Fillon is trying to ride out the scandal, but his position is badly weakened: every day, when he is campaigning, he is confronted with hecklers and protesters. If his poll ratings remain at their current level, he will be eliminated in the first round. Furthermore, Fillon already has said that if he is indicted—still a distinct possibility—he will withdraw from the presidential race.
With LR struggling to maintain its position in the election campaign, there have been rumors of desperate discussions behind closed doors among LR politicians to formulate a ‘plan B’. Alain Juppé, who came in second in the LR Primaries, has stated a number of times that he would refuse to step in for Fillon. The reason is almost certainly that Juppé has already been found guilty in 2003 of creating illegal no-show jobs at the Paris Town Hall when Jacques Chirac was mayor in the 1980s and 1990s.
With the threatened indictment against Sarkozy, another major LR figure and potential replacement for Fillon, should he drop out, is now in long-term legal jeopardy.
The fight over whether to bring the accusation to court could take from 4 to 14 months. The first appeal could take another 4 to 6 months. If the decision to indict is confirmed in this court, Herzog could appeal the ruling. The second appeal process would be heard in the Court of Cassation, which can take from 6 to 8 months. If the court also confirms the indictment, only then would Sarkozy be tried.
There can be little doubt that President François Hollande’s administration is involved in the proceedings against Sarkozy. In a country where it is widely known that the judiciary’s independence from the executive is tenuous at best, one can safely surmise that Hollande’s Socialist Party (PS) is not unhappy that a leading LR politician and potential alternative to Fillon faces the prospect of a bruising court battle.
The case presented against Sarkozy by the judiciary is far from airtight, however. Only one of the three investigating judges, Serge Tournaire, signed Sarkozy’s indictment in a case in which thirteen people have already been indicted, including Bygmalion executives and LR leaders such as General Manager Éric Cesari and Assistant Campaign Manager Jérôme Lavrilleux.
In his indictment, Tournaire admits that the investigation did not establish that Sarkozy ordered LR representatives to set up false accounts to hide the real campaign finances, or that he participated in it, or even that he was informed of the fraudulent maneuvers. Rather, Tournaire argues, Sarkozy benefited from the alleged criminal activities of other LR and Bygmalion officials. He therefore also bears legal responsibility, according to Tournaire.
The judges were divided over whether to send the affair to the courts. The two other judges investigating the case, Renaud Van Ruymbeke and Roger Le Loire, did not sign the indictment. Herzog’s appeal, initiated on Tuesday, is based on the law stating that an indictment can be challenged if it is not signed by all the judges.
Herzog had said from the beginning that Sarkozy would immediately contest any indictment over his 2012 campaign finances. He added it was good news that the prosecutor’s office had recognized in writing that they had no evidence that Sarkozy consciously intended to overshoot his campaign-spending limit.
For LR, however, this crisis and the impact of a threatened indictment of Sarkozy go well beyond the 2017 elections.
The presidential elections are followed immediately by legislative elections and, in the past, the performance of their candidate in the presidential elections has had an enormous influence on the number of deputies that the party can get elected. Furthermore, the Bygmalion scandal has left the party in debt and will force it to take out further loans to finance the party’s legislative campaign.

The election of Trump and the crisis of the European Union

Peter Schwarz

The sixtieth anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, which laid the foundations for the European Union, will be celebrated in Rome this March. This anniversary is reminiscent of the 40th anniversary of the founding of the German Democratic Republic (GDR), which was celebrated with great pomp in East Berlin in October 1989. Only a few weeks later, the GDR collapsed. Likewise, the European Union is in the throes of a fatal crisis. All the tensions, conflicts and contradictions that the Treaty of Rome was supposed to have overcome are emerging once again.
The ferocious denunciation of the EU by US President Donald Trump—his threat of retaliatory tariffs, his suggestion that he might seek an alliance with Russia at the expense of Europe, and the close connections of his chief strategist Stephen Bannon to right-wing extremists in Europe—has made it clear that the EU can no longer base itself on the support of the US, a fundamental prerequisite of its existence in the past.
In discussing the Iraq war in 2003, the WSWS explained that the post-war order was “in fact, a departure from the historical norm.” David North, chairman of the International Editorial Board of the WSWS, wrote that “[t]he more basic tendency of American capitalism, rooted in its somewhat belated emergence as a major imperialist power, had been to augment its world position at the expense of Europe.” This analysis has now been confirmed. Trump’s stance on the European Union is only the most extreme expression of a development that has been underway for a long time.
Highlighting the deepening tensions, the White House has increasingly cast Germany as an economic adversary of the United States. Peter Navarro, the head of Donald Trump’s National Trade Council, went so far as to effectively declare Germany a currency manipulator. He said the euro was “grossly undervalued” and was equivalent to an “implicit Deutsche Mark,” whose low valuation, as the Financial Times put it, “gave Germany an advantage over its main trading partners.”
Earlier this week, Jens Weidmann, the head of Germany’s Bundesbank, shot back that “German companies are above all competitive because they are excellently positioned in global markets and convince with innovative products.”
Berlin has reacted to Washington’s threats through economic and military countermeasures, trying to unite Europe behind its own hegemonic aims.
German weekly Die Zeit published a report entitled “Counterattack,” which claims that the EU has begun “to prepare for a trade war against the US.” It plans “to react to punitive tariffs from the Americans with retaliatory measures,” and is seeking a free trade agreement with Mexico and several Asian states. “Where the Americans shut themselves off, the Europeans should, instead, be open,” it states.
Berlin is making use of the threats from Washington and the possibility of closer relations between the US and Russia to bring Europe under its own dominance. For some time, a discussion has been carried out in the German media that portrays Brexit and the election of Trump as opportunities rather than merely a danger.
This week, outgoing German President Joachim Gauck gave a speech on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Maastricht Treaty in which he said that “[t]he time has come for European countries and in particular for Germany, which for many years took their lead from the United States, to become more self-confident and autonomous.” He cynically insisted that it was necessary not to “abandon the values on which the European project is based,” and called for Europe to “increase its defence capabilities.”
Germany’s attempt, seven decades after its defeat in the Second World War, to rise once again to dominance over Europe is exacerbating national tensions and providing political fodder for right-wing nationalist forces.
In most European countries, the ruling class is split on this question. In France, while the far-right presidential candidate Marine Le Pen is demanding France’s exit from the EU and is orienting to Trump and Putin, her possible opponent in the runoff election, Emmanuel Macron, is emphasizing a decidedly German- and EU-friendly course.
However, the fundamental cause of the crisis of the EU is not to be found in the election of President Trump. Even before the US election, the EU had already entered the deepest crisis in its entire history. Brexit, the Euro crisis, national debt, the refugee crisis, tensions between east and west and between north and south, and the rise of right-wing, chauvinist parties threatened to break it to pieces.
At the same time, explosive social tensions are developing beneath the surface. One out of ten people in Europe is officially unemployed, and one out of four is impoverished or socially marginalized. In the poorest countries in Eastern Europe, the average monthly wage is only €400. Even in the wealthier countries, millions of people work under precarious conditions on the edge of destitution.
The ruling class is responding to this crisis by militarizing, strengthening and arming the state apparatus, closing borders and imposing unending austerity. The European working class confronts two dangers, which are in fact two sides of the same coin. First, it is faced with the transformation of the EU from an economic union into a military union that is also arming itself to suppress internal social and political dissent. For example, France has been under a state of emergency for 15 months. Second, it is faced with the splintering of Europe into national states under right-wing authoritarian regimes. Both of these trajectories mean a decline into war and barbarism.
However, the worldwide crisis of capitalism, expressed most sharply in the rise of Trump and the crisis of the EU, also produces the objective prerequisites for an offensive of the working class, the only social force that can prevent a repetition of the catastrophes of the twentieth century.
The only progressive basis for European integration is the program of the United Socialist States of Europe. To wage a successful struggle against war, nationalism and social inequality, the working class needs an independent, revolutionary leadership, which opposes all representatives of the ruling class on the basis of a socialist perspective. This leadership is the International Committee of the Fourth International.

9 Feb 2017

Université Paris-Saclay Master’s Scholarship Program for International Students 2017/2018

Application Deadline:  The Scholarship Application Deadline for each wave will be sent by email to all students concerned.
Results announcement dates:
Wave 1: Early April 2017
Wave 2: Mid-June 2017
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): France
About the Award: Université Paris-Saclay seeks to promote access to its master’s degree programmes to international students, taught in its member establishments, and to make it easier for highly-qualified international students to attend the University, especially those wishing to develop an academic project through research up to the doctoral level.
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
Considered as eligible:
  • Newcomer international students, maximum 30 years old the year of acceptance.
  • International students living in France less than one year, enrolled into a student programme that does not confer a degree.
  • International students living in France less than one year, taking language classes that do not confer a degree (type FLE or other).
Considered as illegible:
  • Individuals already living in France (except for the cases mentioned above).
  • Individuals who have suspended their studies for more than two consecutive years.
  • Holders of any other type of scholarship whose amount exceeds 600€/month.
Students who have already studied in France within an internship or a study-abroad programme as part of their curriculum (type Erasmus) are considered eligible.
Selection: 
  • Being admitted into a master’s programme does not automatically entitle the student to be eligible for a scholarship.
  • Candidates for the international master’s scholarship programme will be selected by the admission panel among all the students enrolled at Université Paris-Saclay.
  • Only the students contacted by email can submit an application.
  • No unsolicited application is allowed.
Number of Awardees: 160
Value of Scholarship: 
  • The Université Paris-Saclay scholarship is 10,000€ per year. It is paid by the establishment the candidate is registered in for the duration of the academic year, and for a period of no less than 10 consecutive months per year.
  • A maximum of 1,000€ for travel and visa expenses is also awarded depending on the candidate’s country of origin.
  • The winners will receive the scholarship and the travel and visa coverage only upon their arrival in France. No advanced payment can be made.
Duration of Scholarship: The scholarships are awarded for 1 or 2 years, depending on the initial admission level (M1 or M2), to newly enrolled master’s students at Université Paris-Saclay (2017/2018), providing that the necessary number of credits has been obtained to pass to a superior level.
How to Apply: To participate in Wave 1, the students must ensure their application file be completed and  the references be provided before the beginning of March at the latest. For Wave 2 participants, the application file is expected to be completed before the end of April.
Interested candidates are advised to go through the application procedure on the scholarship webpage before applying
Award Provider: Université Paris-Saclay

The Fulbright African Research Scholar Program (ARSP) 2017

Application Deadline: 1st June,  2017
To be taken at (country): USA
About the Award: Two categories of grants are offered in the ARSP:  research grants and program and curriculum development grants.
Research Grants: Awards of 3 to 9 months are offered for selected university faculty professionals to conduct research in any academic discipline at a U.S. academic or research institution.  Preference will be given to individuals with a doctorate degree, at least three years of university teaching experience, a productive scholarly record, and whose projects relate directly to their ongoing teaching and/or research responsibilities.
Program and Curriculum Development Grants: Awards of 3 to 5 months are offered for qualified university faculty to conduct research in any academic discipline at a U.S. academic or research institution.  Proposals should be linked to professional duties and demonstrate how the scholar will use the knowledge gained to develop new courses, curricula, or programs at the home institution.
HIV/AIDS: includes a special set of grants for scholars with proposals in HIV/AIDS-related research. Scholars in all academic disciplines are invited to formulate proposals with an HIV/AIDS focus.  Candidates may apply either as research scholars or as program and curriculum development scholars.
Type: Research
Eligibility: 
  1. An intended applicant must be a citizen of Nigeria or a permanent resident, and should hold a valid passport issued from the country in which the application is made.
  2. In addition, applicants must have at least three (3) years of post-doctoral degree training or teaching experience at the time of application.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Grants: Fully-funded
Grants are not for the principal purpose of:
  • Attending conferences
  • Completing doctoral dissertations
  • Travel and consultation at multiple institutions, or
  • Clinical medical research involving patient contact
How to Apply: The application is accessible at https://apply.embark.com/student/fulbright/scholars.
Award Provider: Fulbright Commission.

African Economic Research Consortium (AERC) 2017 Masters & PhD Program for African Researchers

Application Deadline: 20th February 2017
Offered annually? Yes
About the Award: DAAD, a public funded, self- governing organization of the institutions of higher education in Germany, promotes international academic exchange as well as educational co-operation with developing countries through a variety of funding and scholarship programmes.
The Collaborative Masters of Science in Agricultural and Applied Economics (CMAAE) programme of the African Economic Research Consortium (AERC) is run in a network of 17 participating universities in 12 countries in Eastern, Central and Southern Africa.
The CMAAE PhD fellowship programme aims at building the staff capacity of network universities that may have inadequate capacity in teaching and research. The PhD should be in Agricultural Economics through coursework, research and thesis in the Sub-Saharan region among the CMAAE accredited universities within East Africa (Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, and Ethiopia).
Field of Study: Fields of specialization covered in the CMAAE programme include Agricultural and Rural Development, Agricultural Policy and Trade, Environment and Natural Resource Management, and Agribusiness Management.
Type: Masters, PhD, Research
Eligibility: 
Masters
  • Must have completed their last university degree less than six (6) years ago at the time of application;
  • Applicants from Sub Saharan African countries i.e. nationals from Kenya, Burundi, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, South Sudan, and Ethiopia are eligible for DAAD funding for studies at the five (5) CMAAE accredited universities [Makerere University (Uganda), Sokoine University of Agriculture (Tanzania), Egerton University and University of Nairobi (Kenya), and Haramaya University (Ethiopia)];
  • Applicants from Botswana, Swaziland, Zambia, Mozambique, Lesotho and Namibia are also eligible for DAAD funding for studies as non-nationals at the five (5) CMAAE accredited universities listed above;
  • Applicants will apply to AERC directly and only those shortlisted will be eligible to apply to DAAD through DAAD website portal. DAAD will undertake the final selection of MSc awardees from the shortlisted applicants.
Doctorate
A. PhD Fellowship Programme for CMAAE network faculty staff
  • Must be a holder of masters in agricultural and applied economics, or related discipline;
  • Must be a staff or potential staff member of a participating CMAAE university who is earmarked for staff retention to build department of agricultural economics capacity for teaching and research;
  • Must be recommended by a participating network university. The recommendation letter must indicate the willingness of the university to absorb the candidate upon successful completion of his/her PhD.
B. PhD Programme for CMAAE graduates
  • Must have attained at least a Second Class Honours (Upper Division) or equivalent in Agricultural Economics or related field from an accredited university;
  • Must have a Master’s Degree (with coursework and thesis component) in Economics, Agricultural Economics or related fields from a CMAAE network university;
  • The coursework should have covered microeconomics, macroeconomics and quantitative methods;
  • Possession of at least one relevant publication in a refereed journal will be an added advantage
  • Evidence of engagement in economic management, research and/training in the public sector will be an added advantage;
  • Applicants will apply to AERC directly and only those shortlisted will be eligible to apply to DAAD through DAAD website portal. DAAD will undertake the final selection of PhD awardees from the shortlisted applicants.
Selection: AERC will shortlist eligible applicants who will then be informed to apply to DAAD through DAAD web portal. DAAD will carry out their plagiarism tests on PhD proposals while AERC will communicate to the successful awardees thereafter
Number of Awardees: 5
Duration of Scholarship: The duration of the Ph.D. programme is three (3) years and that of Masters is two (2) years, generally starting in September 2017.
How to Apply: Interested applicants must submit their applications for admission directly to the respective host universities (application procedure can be obtained from the respective university websites). Upon receipt of an admission letter, temporary admission letter or letter assuring admission from the specific university, the applicant should apply for scholarship by submitting the following documents via
not later than February 20, 2017:
  • Signed curriculum vitae; please use the Europass CV template (http://europass.cedefop.europa.eu)
  • A signed copy of the DAAD Information Sheet for Students
  • Certified copies of all university degree certificates
  • Certified copies of all university transcripts
  • At least temporary admission letter including fee structure of respective course (original or certified copy only), or an official letter assuring admission
  • Letter of motivation [Maximum two (2) pages]
  • Academic reference from at least a senior lecturer and proof of employment if applicable (original only)
  • PhD proposals must demonstrate relevance to agricultural development
  • Two (2) recommendation letters of academic referees
Award Provider: DAAD,  AERC
Important Notes: Females, candidates from less privileged regions or groups as well as candidates with disabilities are especially encouraged to apply.

Goi Peace Foundation/UNESCO International Essay Contest for Young People 2017

Application Deadline: 15th June, 2017
Offered Annually: Yes
About the Award: This annual essay contest is organized in an effort to harness the energy, imagination and initiative of the world’s youth in promoting a culture of peace and sustainable development. It also aims to inspire society to learn from the young minds and to think about how each of us can make a difference in the world.
Essay Theme:

“Learning from Nature”

Modern civilization has developed through controlling nature and exploiting its resources. At the same time, we human beings are part of the natural world, and nature has many things to teach us. Scientists, philosophers, poets, and artists have all found inspiration in nature. What can we learn from nature, and how can we make use of that learning for the future? Please describe your ideas, including your own observations and experiences.
goi peace essay competition
Essay Guidelines
1. Essays may be submitted by anyone up to 25 years old (as of June 15, 2017) in one of the following age categories:
a) Children (ages up to 14)
b) Youth (ages 15 – 25)
2. Essays must be 700 words or less in English, French, Spanish or German, or 1600 characters or less in Japanese, excluding essay title. Essays may be typed or printed.
3. Essays must have a cover page indicating:
(1) category (Children or Youth) (2) essay title (3) your name (4) address (5) phone number (6) e-mail (7) nationality (8) age as of June 15, 2016 (9) gender (10) school name (if applicable) (11) word count.
Teachers and youth directors may submit a collection of essays from their class or group.
Please enclose a list of participants’ names, ages and the name and contact information of the submitting teacher or director.
* Entries missing any of the above information will not be considered.
* Please note that the organizer is unable to confirm receipt of essays or answer individual inquiries concerning contest results.
4. Entries may be submitted by postal mail or online.
* IMPORTANT: To send your essay online, you must go to the online registration page at www.goipeace.or.jp and follow the required steps.
5. Essays must be original and unpublished.
6. Essays must be written by one person. Co-authored essays are not accepted.
7. Copyright of the essays entered will be assigned to the organizer
Award
The following awards will be given in the Children’s category and Youth category respectively:
1st Prize:Certificate and prize of 100,000 Yen (approx. US$870 as of February 2017)… 1 entrant
2nd Prize:Certificate and prize of 50,000 Yen (approx. US$435 as of February 2017)… 2 entrants
3rd Prize:Certificate and gift… 5 entrants
Honorable Mention:Certificate and gift… 25 entrants
* 1st prize winners will be invited to the award ceremony to be held in Tokyo, Japan on November 25, 2017 and will receive the Minister of Education Award. (Travel expenses will be covered by the organizer.)
* Additional awards (Recognition for Effort, Best School Award, School Incentive Award) will be given if applicable.
* All prize winners will be announced on October 31, 2017 on this website. Certificates and gifts will be mailed to the winners in December 2017.
How to Submit Essay
Please send your entries to:
International Essay Contest c/o The Goi Peace Foundation
1-4-5 Hirakawacho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-0093, Japan
OR
Send online through www.goipeace.or.jp
For inquiries, please contact essay@goipeace.or.jp
Visit contest webpage for details
Sponsors for International Contest
The contest is endorsed by the:
  • Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan;
  • Japanese National Commission for UNESCO;
  • Japan Private High School Federation;
  • Japan Broadcasting Corporation;
  • Nikkei Inc.;
  • Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education
And supported by FELISSIMO Corporation

World Bank Group/Wharton School Ideas for Action Competition 2017

Application Deadline:  28th February, 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Any
To be taken at (country): Any
Field/Level of Study: Any
About the Award: Ideas for Action, now hosting its third global competition, aims to provide young leaders with a unique opportunity to help shape the global development agenda.
Past winning proposals include a peer-to-peer hyper local approach to last-mile delivery in Nigeria, a mobile platform that allows users to inform themselves and alert others of traffic and security problems in real time, and a novel microinsurance product for remittance payments in India.
Selection/Eligibility Criteria:
  • Teams must consist of two to six members and may be formed across different schools, institutions, companies, countries, nationalities etc.
  • Students and young professionals between the ages 18 and 35 from around the world are invited participate. Youths between the ages of 14 to18 may participate in the high school initiative, Ideas for Action 14-18.
  • Teams must register at www.ideas4action.org prior to submitting their proposal. Once registered, teams will receive additional materials to help them prepare their proposals.
  • Submission requirements can be found on the website.
Number of Awardees: 10 teams
Value of Scholarship: Winners of the competition will
  • Present their ideas at the IMF & World Bank Annual Meetings,
  • Receive support from a dedicated startup accelerator at the Wharton School, and
  • Benefit from unique networking opportunities with experts from international development, academia, and the private sector.
Duration of Scholarship: Ongoing
How to Apply: Register at www.ideas4action.org
Award Provider: World Bank Group, Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania
Important Notes: Teams are encouraged to submit an executive summary of their proposal by December 31, 2016. A jury will provide feedback that will help teams develop their full proposals by February 28, 2017. Alternatively, teams can elect to skip the executive summary stage and submit only a full proposal:
  • Deadline for full proposal submissions: February 28, 2017
  • Announcement of submissions selected for the final round: March 21, 2017
  • Deadline for final submissions: April 17, 2017

Global Management of Social Issues Undergraduate Scholarships for International Students 2017/2018 – The Netherlands

Application Deadline: 1st May 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Tilburg University, Netherlands
Field of Study: Social and behavioural sciences
Type:  Undergraduate, Bachelor’s degree
Eligibility: 
  • To qualify for the Scholarship you must fulfill the following criteria, in addition to the regular requirements for admission to the Bachelor’s program:
  • Candidates must have been (unconditionally) admitted to the Bachelor’s program in Global Management of Social Issues for the academic year 2016-2017.
  • Candidates must be newly enrolled students at Tilburg University.
Selection:  Scholarships will be awarded on the basis of the qualifications and motivation of the candidates. Candidates do not need to apply for the Scholarship separately, but will be considered for the Scholarship award during the application process. Scholarship candidates must include a paragraph to their motivation letter explaining why they think they should be awarded the scholarship and what they can contribute to the program. Successful candidates will be informed by May 31, 2017.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The Scholarship will consist of a monthly allowance for living expenses (a total amount of €10,000 per year for three years), arranged by the School of Social and Behavioral Sciences.
Duration of Scholarship:  The Scholarship will be extended each year, provided grant-holders attain good academic results and are on-course to graduate from the Bachelor’s program in Global Management of Social Issues program by September 2020 at the latest.
How to Apply: Candidates do not need to apply for the Scholarship separately, but will be considered for the Scholarship award during the application process. Successful candidates will be informed by May 31, 2017. The Scholarship will be extended each year, provided grant-holders attain good academic results and are on-course to graduate from the Bachelor’s program in Global Management of Social Issues program by September 2020, at the latest.
Award Provider: Tilburg University – School of Social and Behavioral Sciences

Seattle Just Divested Billions From Wells Fargo Over Dakota Access Pipeline

J. Gabriel Ware & James Trimarco


The movement to stop the controversial Dakota Access pipeline through financial activism took an important step forward today, as the Seattle City Council voted 9-0 to approve a bill that terminates a valuable city contract with Wells Fargo. The bank, one of the largest in the United States, has provided more than $450 million in credit to the companies building the pipeline.
The move makes Seattle the first city to divest from a financial institution because of its role in the Dakota Access pipeline, a $3.8 billion project that would run from western North Dakota to Illinois, and is fiercely opposed by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. Wells Fargo is one of 17 banks directly financing the project.
For Olivia One Feather, a Lakota Sioux tribal member who drove more than 1,200 miles from North Dakota to testify in favor of divestment, the day was bittersweet. She was excited about the ordinance, she said, but horrified by news that the Army Corps of Engineers was about to grant an easement to move the pipeline project forward.
The current divestment campaign began at the individual level, as people withdrew funds or closed accounts—a tactic that has taken more than $57 million out of DAPL-financing banks so far, according to the website DefundDAPL. But as divestment spreads to municipalities, tribes, and universities, the amount of money at stake becomes much larger. About $3 billion moves in and out of Seattle’s accounts with Wells Fargo each year, according to the Seattle Weekly.
“People might argue that Seattle’s $3 billion account is just a blip on the radar for Wells Fargo, but this movement is poised to scale up,” said Hugh MacMillan, a senior researcher at the environmental nonprofit Food & Water Watch. “I think you’ll see more cities following Seattle’s lead.”
Matt Remle, a Seattle-based organizer who is a member of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, agrees. He says he’s been in talks with community leaders in a number of other cities, and they’re looking to divest from Wells Fargo too.
Minneapolis is perhaps the furthest along. Last December, the city council there asked its staff to research ways to stop doing business with financial institutions that help finance the Dakota Access pipeline and other fossil fuel projects. Alondra Cano, one of the city councilmembers who made that proposal, says it’s already producing results. “We’re now exploring new banking structures that will put us more in line with our interests in doing business with organizations and banking institutions that aren’t damaging the environment,” she said.
Cano points out that the city’s current contract with Wells Fargo doesn’t end until 2018, so the city has time to plan its next moves. And Seattle’s new ordinance will help, she said. “Any time other municipalities of similar size and character are able to move forward down the path of divestment, it makes it easier for sister municipalities like ours to do the same thing,” she explained. “I’m excited to see their results and possibly exchange ideas and strategies about divestment, about making that a reality for our cities.”
Elected officials in at least three other cities—including Boulder, Colorado; Santa Fe, New Mexico; and Portland, Oregon—have indicated that they might soon decide to follow a similar path. Boulder’s city council voted on Jan. 31 to investigate alternatives to banking with JPMorgan Chase, another financial supporter of the Dakota Access pipeline.
Divesting from one bank means finding another one, and Seattle’s ordinance also lays out a new way of doing that. The bill orders the city to create a “competitive bidding process” to find a new banking partner by Dec. 18, 2018, which is when the current contract with Wells Fargo ends. The city will consider “socially responsible banking and fair business practices” as a factor in its decision.
Kshama Sawant, the socialist Seattle council member who co-sponsored the bill, has advocated that Seattle choose a credit union or create a public, city-owned bank. However, a Washington State law effectively prohibits cities from banking with credit unions.
In the meantime, allies continue to express support. Last Friday, the prominent writer and Black Lives Matter activist Shaun King hailed Seattle’s move as “a huge deal.” He went on to address the banks directly: “If you fund our oppression, if you fund injustice, or if you are willfully silent in the face of those things, people are organizing to defund you and find banks, businesses, and financial institutions that will openly agree to humane values and principles.”

Sri Lanka: Tamil parties launch communal campaign to divert social tensions

Subash Somachandran & S. Jayanth

The Tamil People’s Council (TPC), a Tamil nationalist organisation, has called an Ezhuga Thamizh (Rise up Tamils) protest on February 10 in Batticaloa in Sri Lanka’s Eastern Province. The TPC held a similar demonstration in Jaffna last September.
The purpose of the protest is to divert the growing social tensions among Tamil workers and the poor along communal lines and divide them from their class brothers and sisters in the country’s south.
The TPC was established in 2015 by a section of the parliamentary opposition Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) and various university academics and civil society formations. The TPC is headed by C.V. Wigneswaran, a leading member of the TNA and the Northern Provincial Council’s chief minister.
While senior TNA officials, such as R. Sambandan and M. A. Sumanthiran, have distanced themselves from the TPC campaign, Wigneswaran claims that the protests are strengthening the TNA.
TPC co-leader T. Vasantharajah told the media the group believes that the “political aspirations of people in North and East can be strongly conveyed to the government of this country and to the ‘international,’ especially to the UNHRC [UN Human Rights Council] via the Ezhuga Thamizh.”
The TPC’s demands include greater powers for the North and East provinces, an international war crimes probe and the release of Tamil political prisoners. It is also calling for a ban on new Sinhalese settlements and the spread of Buddhist influence in the North and East, withdrawal of the Sri Lankan military from these provinces, and the return of civilian land seized by the military.
Claims that the TPC represents the “aspirations of people in the North and East of Sri Lanka” are a lie. The organisation speaks, not for oppressed Tamil and Muslim workers and poor, but for the Tamil bourgeoisie and sections of the upper-middle class. Its demand for a “federal solution” seeks a power-sharing arrangement between Colombo and the Tamil elites in the North and East for the joint exploitation of the Tamil working class.
The TPC’s calls for the withdrawal of military from the North and East and the release of political prisoners are to exploit the anger of Tamil masses and divert it into appeals for support from imperialist countries, such as the US and India, the major regional power.
As the name Ezhuga Thamizh implies, the TPC protests are a communalist response to anti-Tamil provocations by Sinhala chauvinist groups in the country’s south. Sinhala extremists headed by former President Mahinda Rajapakse claim that the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which was militarily crushed in May 2009, is being revived. Rajapakse hopes to topple the government and return to power through this reactionary campaign.
During the January 2015 presidential election, the TNA and other Tamil parties and groups, including those now in the TPC, backed the US-orchestrated regime-change operation to replace Rajapakse with Maithripala Sirisena.
Washington wanted Rajapakse to cut his government’s close political and economic relations with Beijing and for Sri Lanka to be integrated into the US war preparations against China. The TNA leadership, and figures such as R. Sambandan and M.A Sumanthiran, were fully involved in this campaign.
The TPC’s claim that the US, India and other international powers, as well as the UNHRC would help Tamil people, is false to the core. These powers backed the communal war by successive Colombo governments against the LTTE because it suited their geo-strategic interests.
The UNHRC is a tool of imperialism, particularly the US. In 2015, it agreed that the newly-appointed government of Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe could conduct its own war crimes probe, in other words, suppress the truth about Sri Lanka’s civil war. The TNA supported this move.
The TNA and other Tamil groups campaigned for Sirisena’s election, insisting that he would end the anti-democratic methods of the Rajapakse government and end catastrophic living conditions produced by the war. Two years on, Tamil, Muslim and Sinhala people throughout Sri Lanka face ongoing attacks on their democratic rights and living conditions as the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government imposes the social austerity demands of the International Monetary Fund.
Parallel to the growing struggles and strikes in the south, municipal cleaning workers, health workers, voluntary teachers and graduates in the north have regularly demonstrated for permanent appointments and jobs. “Rehabilitated,” former LTTE soldiers have protested at the civil security office demanding jobs while Jaffna University students are campaigning against the government’s education cuts.
Protest hunger strikes in Vavuniya by the relatives of persons who “disappeared” during the war have also won considerable support among workers, students and the poor. A group of people is maintaining sit-down protest at Keppapilavu near Kilinochchi, demanding that the military return agricultural land that belongs to the villagers.
Neither the TPC nor TNA has supported these struggles. The TNA is politically discredited in the eyes of thousands of Tamil workers and the poor for backing every social attack of the pro-US government in Colombo and defending it.
TPC leader Vasantharajah, in fact, recently warned the government and the TNA that “people [in the north and east] are now trying to take their own decisions and act, ignoring the leaders.”
Similarly, an editorial in Virakesari, the Colombo-based Tamil daily, noted that the government’s inability to find “a solution for the daily and basic problems of people, has created a deep discontent among Tamils. Because of this, a situation is growing that the Tamil people, who feel ignored, are mobilising against the leadership of TNA which supports the government’s activities.”
All sections of the ruling elite—Tamil and Sinhala alike—are acutely nervous about the development of a unified struggle of the working class across ethnic lines.
The working class must reject the TPC’s communal campaign. The TPC and TNA defend the interests of the capitalist class and serve the imperialist powers. Most of the TNA leadership hoped that US Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton would win the US presidential election, claiming this would provide an opportunity to “solve problems of Tamils.” After Republican Donald Trump won the election, the TNA leadership said they would appeal for his help.
Tamil, Sinhala and Muslim workers must reject all factions of the Sri Lankan capitalist class and fight for their basic democratic rights and living standards on the basis of an international socialist perspective. This is the program advanced by the Socialist Equality Party (SEP), which has a long and principled record fighting against Colombo’s communalist war, consistently demanding the withdrawal of the military from the North and East and defending the democratic rights of the Tamil people.
The SEP fights for a workers’ and peasants’ government in the form of a Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and Eelam, as part of the broader struggle for a United Socialist States of South Asia and internationally.