20 Feb 2017

The Jean d’Alembert Scholarship Program for Outstanding Young Scientists 2017 – IDEX Paris Saclay

Application Deadline: 31st March 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): South Korea
About the Award: The content of the project to be developed as well as the duration of the fellowship must be defined before the application in connection with the Paris-Saclay reception team.
Two different programs are proposed:
  • Scholarships “young researcher  ” for candidates who have obtained their doctorate for less than ten years,
  • Scholarships “senior researcher” .
In both cases the 6-12 month visit may be divided into a maximum of two distinct periods of at least three months, separated by a maximum of 12 months between the end of the first period and the beginning of the second period.
Type: Postdoctoral, Research
Eligibility:   The content of the project to be developed as well as the duration of the fellowship must be defined before the application in connection with the Paris-Saclay reception team.
Two different programs are proposed:
  • Scholarships “young researcher  ” for candidates who have obtained their doctorate for less than ten years,
  • Scholarships “senior researcher” .
In both cases the 6-12 month visit may be divided into a maximum of two distinct periods of at least three months, separated by a maximum of 12 months between the end of the first period and the beginning of the second period.
  1. Diploma of Doctor (PhD) or equivalent, obtained less than 10 years at the time of application for the Young Researchers program.
  2. The candidate must have been recruited for a post of researcher, engineer or teacher-researcher at the institution of origin (Tenure track possible).
  3. Candidates who have resided in France for more than six months at the time of application are not eligible.
  4. French citizens may apply to the program, provided that their usual place of residence and work has been abroad for at least five years.
  5. The head of the host laboratory will recruit the chairholder. When applying, the host laboratory must ensure that the age limit for recruitment is not exceeded before the end of the contract.
Selection Criteria: Candidates are selected solely on the basis of the quality of the scientific dossier and the project to be developed:
  • Quality of the candidate’s scientific dossier (professional background, impact and originality of the scientific contributions),
  • Quality of the proposed project (importance in its field, relevance of the proposed approach, feasibility, resources available in support besides those of the stock exchange, impact expected for the host laboratory and more broadly for Paris-Saclay Terms of training, valorisation or transfer).
Number of Awardees:  Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The award includes:
  • A monthly salary supplement of € 2600 net for the “young researcher” program and € 3300 net for confirmed researchers,
  • Accompanying costs, which may include operating costs necessary for the implementation of the project and, more generally, the costs associated with the temporary establishment of the fellow in the laboratory in France.
The beneficiary will have to be able to benefit, through the host laboratory, from assistance related to the search for housing, the schooling of children, the learning of the French language, etc.
  • Scholarship covers whole tuition fee
  • Monthly Stipend
How to Apply: An acknowledgment will be sent. Responses will be given approximately one month after the deadline for applications. In all cases, the contract must be signed before December 31, 2017, and the contract end date may not exceed December 31, 2020.
Award Provider: IDEX Paris Saclay

TOTAL/Quay d’Orsay Masters Scholarship for Nigerian Students 2017 – France

Application Deadline: 25th February 2017
Eligible Countries: Nigeria
To be taken at (country): France
Fields of Studies: The scholarship is dedicated to students interested in applying for a master degree in France in the following fields:
• Management 
• International Law 
• Economics
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  • Only Nigerian nationals are eligible to apply
    • Students should have graduated between 2013 and 2016
    • Must hold a first degree with at least Second class upper division relevant to the fields defined above 
    • Must have completed 1(one) year mandatory NYSC programme
Selection:  The selected applicants will come at their own cost to write Aptitude Tests for English comprehension and numeric computational analysis skills. Applicants who are successful at these tests will be interviewed during the month of March, 2017
Number of Awardees: 3
Value of Scholarship: Fully-funded
Duration of Scholarship: Duration of candidate’s program
How to Apply: 
Copy of your certificates (WAEC, NECO, Bachelor degree etc.…);
• Transcripts;
• Detailed resume or CV;
•Motivation letter explaining clearly your educational path, professional experience (if any) and your future prospects;
• Valid means of identification, i.e.: National ID card or international passport.
French proficiency is not required but can be an advantage.
All master programmes are taught in English.
Interested applicants should send their complete application latest by February 25th 2017 to nigeria@campusfrance.org in a single PDF file saved as Name_Surname_Total_French_Embassy_Scholarship_2017.
No paper applications will be accepted.
Only shortlisted candidates will be invited for tests and interviews.
Award Provider: French Embassy

Masdar Institute Masters and PhD Scholarships for Study in UAE 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 31st May 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: UAE and international students
To be taken at (country): UAE
About the Award: Masdar Institute of Science and Technology is the world’s first graduate-level university dedicated to providing real-world solutions to issues of sustainability. The Institute’s goal is to become a world-class research-driven graduate-level university, focusing on advanced energy and sustainable technologies.
Type: Master’s and Doctorate
Eligibility: Applicants must meet all of the following criteria to be eligible to apply for this scholarship:-
For Masters:
  • A relevant undergraduate degree in science, engineering or IT from a recognised and accredited university;
  • A minimum CGPA of 3.0 (on a scale of 4.0) or equivalent (2nd class upper in the British system);
  • A minimum GRE Quantitative score of 155 (700 on the old scale)*;
  • A minimum TOEFL score of 91 (iBT)) or equivalent paper/computer based scores, or a minimum academic IELTS score of 6.5;
  • Three Recommendation Letters;
  • Statement of Objectives.
For Doctoral:
  • A relevant undergraduate and Master’s degree in science, engineering or IT from a recognised and accredited university;
  • A minimum CGPA of 3.0 in the undergraduate degree and a minimum CGPA of 3.2 in the master’s degree, or equivalent;
  • A minimum GRE Quantitative score of 155 (700 on the old scale)*;
  • A minimum TOEFL of 91 on the internet-based test (iBT) or equivalent paper/computer-based scores, or a minimum academic IELTS score of 6.5;
  • Three recommendation letters;
  • Statement of Objectives;
  • Research proposal.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship:  Qualified Master’s and Doctorate degree applicants to Masdar Institute will be provided with full scholarship benefits upon admission. The Masdar Institute Scholarship benefits include the following:
  • 100% of all tuition fees;
  • All required textbooks;
  • A laptop;
  • Reimbursement of GRE and TOEFL exam/test fees;
  • Masdar Institute housing;
  • Monthly stipend;
  • Health insurance;
  • Annual return ticket home (if applicable).
How to Apply:  
Applicants are required to complete the online application and submit the following documents:
  • Copy of undergraduate/graduate transcripts;
  • Statement of Objectives;
  • Copy of GRE and TOEFL (or IELTS) scores;
  • Copy of CV (including education, list of publications, awards, professional experience, etc.);
  • Name and email address of 3 referees (It is preferable that the email addresses provided are university/professional email addresses and not common Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, etc., addresses);
  • To apply, prospective students do not need to submit originals or certified copies of documents. However, if selected, certified documents and a completed undergraduate degree in a relevant field will be required for final admission.
The Statement of Objectives is a very important part of your application and we encourage you to write it carefully. We seek a statement of one to two pages (approximately 400 to 1,000 words) explaining your reasons for wanting to complete your graduate studies at the Masdar Institute of Science and Technology.
Award Provider: Masdar Institute

KU Scholarships for International Students 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 
  • 1st March 2017 for the funding term summer (1 April 2017 – 31 August 2017)
  • 1st September 2017 for the funding term winter (1 October 2017 – 28 February 2018)
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Germany
Type: PhD, Masters
Eligibility: 
  • Academic qualification
  • Personal qualification
  • You have not yet exceeded the maximum funding period (36 months) for this scholarship.
  • You are enrolled as a student at the KU (campus Eichstätt or campus Ingolstadt) during the funding period.
  • Advanced studies with good study performance (from 3rd semester onwards)
  • Financial need.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: This scholarship includes 324,00 € per month.
How to Apply: 
  • application form
  • matriculation certificate
  • proof of academic achievement or Transcript of Records
  • at least one letter of recommendation from a KU professor (degree-seeking students) or a professor from your home university (exchange students)
  • CV in tabular form in English
  • letter of motivation (one page)
  • declaration of need
  • proof of nationality
  • Application declaration (See Application form)
Please send your complete application as a single file PDF to: KU International Office incoming@ku.de
Subject: Scholarship: Promotion of internationalisation
Please note that we only accept complete applications sent as a single PDF-file.
Award Provider:  This scholarship is funded by the Bavarian Ministry of Education and Culture, Science, and Art.

NLNG Nigeria Prize for Literature 2017 for Young Nigerian Writers

Application Deadline: 7th April, 2017
Eligible Countries: Nigeria
To be taken at (country): Nigeria
About the Award: The yearly literary prize is sponsored by Nigeria LNG (NLNG) to honour the best book by a Nigerian author between the last 4 years. The prize rotates around four literary genres: Prose fiction, poetry, drama and children’s literature.
Type: Contest
Eligibility: 
  • No book published before January 2013 will be accepted
  • An author will enter only one published work. More manuscripts will not be accepted
  • No book  previously submitted for this competition may be re-submitted at a later date even if major revisions have been made or a new edition has been published.
  • the prize will be rewarded for no other reason than excellence
Selection: Winners will be announced in October and will be presented to the public on a later date.
Number of Awardees: 4
Value of Contest:
How to Apply: 
  • Ten copies of the entries and if available, an e-copy together with evidence of Nigerian citizenship (photocopy of Nigerian passport or I.D card) may be submitted either by authors or publishers in accordance with the genres in competition.
  • Books should be submitted to Nigeria LNG’s External Relations Division, promoters of the prize, by the stipulated deadline.
  • Complete contact information, including full contact address, phone number(s), email(s), and other relevant contact information will accompany every submission.
Entries shall be sent to:
The Nigeria Prize for Literature,
External Relations Division,
Nigeria LNG Limited,
Intels Aba Road Estate,
Km 16 Port-Harcourt-Aba Expressway,
P.M.B 5660 Port-Harcourt Rivers state
or
The Nigeria Prize for Literature,
External Relations Division,
Heron House
10 Dean Farrar Street,
London, SW1H 0DX
Award Provider: NLNG

Fukushima: a Lurking Global Catastrophe?

Robert Hunziker

Year over year, ever since 2011, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear meltdown grows worse and worse, an ugly testimonial to the inherent danger of generating electricity via nuclear fission, which produces isotopes, some of the most deadly poisonous elements on the face of the planet.
Fukushima Diiachi has been, and remains, one of the world’s largest experiments, i.e., what to do when all hell breaks lose aka The China Syndrome. “Scientists still don’t have all the information they need for a cleanup that the government estimates will take four decades and cost ¥8 trillion. It is not yet known if the fuel melted into or through the containment vessel’s concrete floor, and determining the fuel’s radioactivity and location is crucial to inventing the technology to remove the melted fuel,” (Emi Urabe, Fukushima Fuel-Removal Quest Leaves Trail of Dead Robots, The Japan Times, Feb. 17, 2017).
As it happens, “”inventing technology” is experimental stage stuff. Still, there are several knowledgeable sources that believe the corium, or melted core, will never be recovered. Then what?
According to a recent article, “Potential Global Catastrophe of the Reactor No. 2 at Fukushima Daiichi,” d/d Feb. 11, 2017 by Dr. Shuzo Takemoto, professor, Department of Geophysics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto University: The Fukushima nuclear facility is a global threat on level of a major catastrophe.
Meanwhile, the Abe administration dresses up Fukushima Prefecture for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics, necessitating a big fat question: Who in their right mind would hold Olympics in the neighborhood of three out-of-control nuclear meltdowns that could get worse, worse, and still worse? After all, that’s the pattern over the past 5 years; it gets worse and worse. Dismally, nobody can possibly know how much worse by 2020. Not knowing is the main concern about holding Olympics in the backyard of a nuclear disaster zone, especially as nobody knows what’s happening. Nevertheless and resolutely, according to PM Abe and the IOC, the games go on.
Along the way, it’s taken Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) nearly six years to finally get an official reading of radiation levels of the meltdown but in only one unit. Analysis of Unit #2 shows radiation levels off-the-charts at 530 Sieverts, or enough to kill within minutes, illustrative of why it is likely impossible to decommission units 1, 2, and 3. No human can withstand that exposure and given enough time, frizzled robots are as dead as a doornail.
“A short-term, whole-body dose of over 10 sieverts would cause immediate illness and subsequent death within a few weeks, according to the World Nuclear Association” (Emi Urabe, Fukushima Fuel-Removal Quest Leaves Trail of Dead Robots, The Japan Times, Feb. 17, 2017).
Although Fukushima’s similar to Chernobyl Exclusion Zone in some respects, where 1,000 square miles has been permanently sealed off, Fukushima’s different, as the Abe administration is already repopulating portions of Fukushima. If they don’t repopulate, how can the Olympics be held with food served from Fukushima and including events like baseball held in Fukushima Prefecture?
Without question, an old saw – what goes around comes around – rings true when it comes to radiation, and it should admonish (but it doesn’t phase ‘em) strident nuclear proponents, claiming Fukushima is an example of how safe nuclear power is “because there are so few, if any, deaths” (not true). As Chernobyl clearly demonstrates: Over time, radiation cumulates in bodily organs. For a real life example of how radiation devastates human bodies, consider this fact: 453,391 children with bodies ravaged, none born at the time of the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986, today receive special healthcare because of Chernobyl radiation-related medical problems like cancer, digestive, respiratory, musculoskeletal, eye disease, blood disease, congenital malformation, and genetic abnormalities. Their parents were children in the Chernobyl zone in 1986 (Source: Chernobyl’s Legacy: Kids With Bodies Ravaged by Disaster, USA Today, April 17, 2016).
Making matters worse yet, Fukushima Diiachi sets smack dab in the middle of earthquake country, which defines the boundaries of Japan. In that regard, according to Dr. Shuzo Takemoto, professor, Department of Geophysics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto University: “The problem of Unit 2… If it should encounter a big earth tremor, it will be destroyed and scatter the remaining nuclear fuel and its debris, making the Tokyo metropolitan area uninhabitable. The Tokyo Olympics in 2020 will then be utterly out of the question,” (Shuzo Takemoto, Potential Global Catastrophe of the Reactor No. 2 at Fukushima Daiichi, February 11, 2017).
Accordingly, the greater Tokyo metropolitan area remains threatened for as long as Fukushima Diiachi is out of control, which could be for generations, not years. Not only that, Gee-Whiz, what if the big one hits during the Olympics? After all, earthquakes come unannounced. Regrettably, Japan has had 564 earthquakes the past 365 days. It’s an earthquake-ridden country. Japan sits at the boundary of 4 tectonic plates shot through with faults in zigzag patterns, very lively and of even more concern, the Nankai Trough, the candidate for the big one, sits nearly directly below Tokyo. On a geological time scale, it may be due for action anytime within the next couple of decades. Fukushima Prefecture’s not that far away.
Furthermore, the Fukushima Diiachi nuclear complex is tenuous, at best: “All four buildings were structurally damaged by the original earthquake some five years ago and by the subsequent hydrogen explosions so should there be an earthquake greater than seven on the Richter scale, it is very possible that one or more of these structures could collapse, leading to a massive release of radiation as the building falls on the molten core beneath.” (Helen Caldicott: The Fukushima Nuclear Meltdown Continues Unabated, Independent Australia, February 13, 2017).
Complicating matters further, the nuclear site is located at the base of a mountain range. Almost daily, water flows from the mountain range beneath the nuclear plant, liquefying the ground, a sure-fire setup for cascading buildings when the next big one hits. For over five years now, radioactive water flowing out of the power plant into the Pacific carries isotopes like cesium 134 and cesium 137, strontium 90, tritium, plutonium americium and up to 100 more isotopes, none of which are healthy for marine or human life, quite the opposite in fact as those isotopes slowly cumulate, and similar to the Daleks of Doctor Who fame (BBC science fiction series, 1963-present) “Exterminate! Exterminate! Exterminate!”
Isotopes bio-concentrate up the food chain from algae to crustaceans to small fish to big fish to bigger humans. Resultant cancer cells incubate anytime from two years to old age, leading to death. That’s what cancer does; it kills.
Still, the fact remains nobody really knows for sure how directly Fukushima Diiachi radiation affects marine life, but how could it be anything other than bad? After all, it’s a recognized fact that radiation cumulates over time; it’s tasteless, colorless, and odorless as it cumulates in the body, whether in fish or further up the food chain in humans. It travels!
An example is Cesium 137 one of the most poisonous elements on the planet. One gram of Cesium 137 the size of a dime will poison one square mile of land for hundreds of years. That’s what’s at stake at the world’s most rickety nuclear plant, and nobody can do anything about it. In fact, nobody knows what to do. They really don’t.
When faced with the prospect of not knowing what to do, why not bring on the Olympics? That’s pretty good cover for a messy situation, making it appear to hundreds of thousands of attendees, as well as the world community “all is well.” But, is it? Honestly….
The Fukushima nuclear meltdown presents a special problem for the world community. Who knows what to believe after PM Abe lied to the IOC to get the Olympics; see the following headline from Reuters News: “Abe’s Fukushima ‘Under Control’ Pledge to Secure Olympics Was a Lie: Former PM,” Reuters, Sept. 7, 2016.
“Abe gave the assurances about safety at the Fukushima plant in his September 2013 speech to the International Olympic Committee to allay concerns about awarding the Games to Tokyo. The comment met with considerable criticism at the time… Mr. Abe’s ‘under control remark, that was a lie,’ Koizumi (former PM) now 74 and his unruly mane of hair turned white, told a news conference where he repeated his opposition to nuclear power,” Ibid.
As such, a very big conundrum precedes the 2020 games: How can the world community, as well as Olympians, believe anything the Abe administration says about the safety and integrity of Fukushima?
Still, the world embraces nuclear power more so than ever before as it continues to expand and grow. Sixty reactors are currently under construction in fifteen countries. In all, 160 power reactors are in the planning stage and 300 more have been proposed. Pro-Nuke-Heads claim Fukushima proves how safe nuclear power is because there are so few, if any, deaths, as to be inconsequential. That’s a boldfaced lie.
Here’s one of several independent testimonials on deaths because of Fukushima Diiachi radiation exposure (many, many, many more testimonials are highlighted in prior articles, including USS Ronald Reagan sailors on humanitarian rescue missions at the time): “It’s a real shame that the authorities hide the truth from the whole world, from the UN. We need to admit that actually many people are dying. We are not allowed to say that, but TEPCO employees also are dying. But they keep mum about it,” Katsutaka Idogawa, former mayor of Futaba (Fukushima Prefecture), Fukushima Disaster: Tokyo Hides Truth as Children Die, Become Ill from Radiation – Ex-Mayor, RT News, April 21, 2014.

Western Sahara: An albatross On African Union’s Conscience

Nizar Visram


AT the 28th Summit meeting of the African Union (AU) held in Addis Ababa on 30 January 2017, Morocco’s readmission to the continental body generated heated discussion. At the end of the day the Kingdom of Morocco managed to win over sufficient member states on its side and it was allowed to join the fold unconditionally.Summit meeting of the African Union (AU) held in Addis Ababa on 30 January 2017, Morocco’s readmission to the continental body generated heated discussion. At the end of the day the Kingdom of Morocco managed to win over sufficient member states on its side and it was allowed to join the fold unconditionally.
Morocco left the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), precursor to the AU, in 1984 after the OAU recognised the right to self-determination and independence for the people of the  Western Sahara and admitted the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) that was proclaimed in 1976 by the Sahrawi people’s Polisario Front.and admitted the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) that was proclaimed in 1976 by the Sahrawi people’s Polisario Front.
It was in keeping with the OAU principle not to recognise the occupation of any part of the continent that it admitted the SADR to its membership. While SADR claimed sovereignty over the  Western Sahara territory, Morocco saw it as an integral part of its own territory. Thus, rather than accept SADR’s independence, Morocco left the OAU.territory, Morocco saw it as an integral part of its own territory. Thus, rather than accept SADR’s independence, Morocco left the OAU.
Since then Morocco has refused to join the AU unless the organisation withdraws the membership of SADR.
The area of  Western Sahara has been occupied by Morocco since 1976 when Spain pulled out and relinquished its claim as a colonial power over the territory. This former Spanish colony was then annexed by Morocco. Saharawi people, who fought Spanish colonial oppression, were now forced to fight Moroccan occupation. They conducted resistance struggle under the leadership of Polisario Front until 1991 when the United Nations (UN) brokered a truce.has been occupied by Morocco since 1976 when Spain pulled out and relinquished its claim as a colonial power over the territory. This former Spanish colony was then annexed by Morocco. Saharawi people, who fought Spanish colonial oppression, were now forced to fight Moroccan occupation. They conducted resistance struggle under the leadership of Polisario Front until 1991 when the United Nations (UN) brokered a truce.
A UN-supervised referendum on independence of  Western Sahara was promised in 1992 but it was aborted by Morocco. A UN peacekeeping mission that was to organise the referendum has remained in the territory ever since, while Morocco built a 2,700km-long sand wall, with landmines.was promised in 1992 but it was aborted by Morocco. A UN peacekeeping mission that was to organise the referendum has remained in the territory ever since, while Morocco built a 2,700km-long sand wall, with landmines.
SADR, headed by the Polisario Front, has been recognized by the AU as the legitimate government in exile. For decades Morocco made futile attempts to delegitimize SADR and Polisario. Eventually it applied to rejoin AU without precondition.
AU member states argued that Morocco should not be readmitted unless it accepts the 1960 UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, which states that, “All peoples have the right to self-determination; and by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status”
Morocco was also asked to accept unconditionally the OAU/AU African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights which provides that:
“Nothing shall justify the domination of a people by another. All peoples shall have the unquestionable and inalienable right to self-determination. They shall freely determine their political status.”
Thus, before readmission Morocco should have accepted all the 33 Articles of the Constitutive Act of the AU with  Western Sahara as a founding member. Morocco should also accept the AU Act which recognises African colonial boundaries, thus making its continued occupation of as a founding member. Morocco should also accept the AU Act which recognises African colonial boundaries, thus making its continued occupation of Western Sahara illegal.illegal.
All this was thrust aside and Morocco was readmitted to the AU when 39 out of the 54 African member states voted for Morocco. They tacitly endorsed the longstanding occupation of  Western Sahara, while Morocco refuses to comply with the successive UN resolutions on the holding of a referendum on self-determination
Western Sahara thus remains the continent’s last colonial outpost, occupied by another African state. It is an albatross on the African Union’s conscience, since it was a departure from its founding principles.thus remains the continent’s last colonial outpost, occupied by another African state. It is an albatross on the African Union’s conscience, since it was a departure from its founding principles.
Morocco’s readmission was reportedly influenced by Morocco’s King Mohammad’s affluence. This became evident when he demonstrated his largesse while touring the continent, lobbying for support from African heads.
It is said he will now bankroll the AU in line with what Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi used to do. The two are, of course, poles apart. Gaddafi, arguably, had a pan-Africanist and anti-Imperialist vision, while the king aims at continued annexation of  Western Sahara
That is why prior to the AU vote the King embarked on charm offensive by touring African countries, seeking support for his AU bid. In February 2014 he set off on a tour of Mali, Ivory Coast, Guinea and Gabon. This was his second regional trip in less than five months. He took with him a contingent of advisors and business executive who negotiated a pile of agreements covering practically everything – from religious training to agriculture and mining projects.
In December 2016 the King concluded the second leg of a nearly two-month, six-country Africa tour, resulting in some 50 bilateral agreements. The visits came on the heels of trips to Rwanda, Tanzania, and Senegal in October, when more than 40 bilateral agreements were signed.
This is how the monarch wound up his whirlwind tour of Africa prior to the AU Summit meeting in January 2017. For those who say the royal expeditions to African countries had altruistic motive, suffice it to quote his official who said:
“Aside from west and central Africa we must open up to east Africa and that is what is under way. The context of Morocco’s return to the African Union is there too of course, and these are important countries in the AU.”
The tour of east Africa “is also a way to get closer to countries which historically had positions which were hostile to Morocco’s interests”, said the Moroccan source
In some circles it is argued that Morocco’s readmission was a ‘positive’ step in that, as full member of the AU, it will now have to recognise the independence and sovereignty of SADR.  If that is so then the readmission should have been conditional
In any case, Morocco has no intention to give in on its occupation. Its return to the union is intended to eventually push for the removal of  Western Sahara out of the AU, thus silencing the voice of the Sahrawi people in connivance with ‘friendly’ member statesout of the AU, thus silencing the voice of the Sahrawi people in connivance with ‘friendly’ member states
Yet while the AU fails to stand by such principles, the kingdom of Morocco is under pressure in the international diplomatic arena where Polisario is gaining global support.
In fact on 21 December 2016, few days before the Addis Ababa Summit, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) dismissed Moroccos claim to Western Sahara.. The ruling means the European Unions trade deals with Morocco do not apply to the occupied territory of  Western Sahara which is endowed with its fish stocks, mineral deposits, agricultural produce and oil reserves.which is endowed with its fish stocks, mineral deposits, agricultural produce and oil reserves.
The ECJ ruled that  Western Sahara cannot be treated as a part of Morocco, meaning no EU-Morocco trade deals can apply to the territory. The ruling confirms the long-established legal status of cannot be treated as a part of Morocco, meaning no EU-Morocco trade deals can apply to the territory. The ruling confirms the long-established legal status of Western Sahara as a non-self-governing territory, and upholds existing international law.as a non-self-governing territory, and upholds existing international law.
The EU member states and institutions have been asked to comply with the ruling and immediately cease all agreements, funding and projects reinforcing Morocco’s illegal occupation of  Western Sahara.
The Court also ruled that a trade deal between the EU and Morocco should be scrapped because it included products from  Western Sahara. Morocco had to accept that any free trade deal would have to exclude  Western Sahara. This includes the fruits and vegetables grown by companies such as Les Domaines Agricoles, which is partly owned by King Mohammed VI.
On top of this there have been more than 100 UN resolutions calling for self-determination for the  Western Sahara. In March 2016, the then UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described the situation in  Western Sahara as an “occupation”as an “occupation”
The UN, however, has to go beyond rhetoric by enforcing its resolutions. It formally recognises the occupation of  Western Sahara as illegal, and has maintained a peacekeeping mission (MINURSO) commissioned to hold a referendum in Sahara since 1991. But it has a skeleton staff, with no mandate to even monitor human rights abuses, thanks to France’s Security Council veto.as illegal, and has maintained a peacekeeping mission (MINURSO) commissioned to hold a referendum in Sahara since 1991. But it has a skeleton staff, with no mandate to even monitor human rights abuses, thanks to France’s Security Council veto.
And so the French oil company Total is active in  Western Sahara, while others have pulled out. Also big investors such as the Norwegian government’s pension fund avoid any deals which involve  Western Sahara. And the EFTA free trade association, a group of non-EU countries including Norway, Switzerland, Iceland and Liechtenstein, excludes  Western Sahara goods from its free trade deal with Morocco.goods from its free trade deal with Morocco.
Morocco’s return to the AU is an affront not only to the people of  Western Sahara but to African people, for Morocco is a country that once refused to host the African Cup of Nations on flimsy grounds that Moroccans would be infected by African teams bringing in Ebola virusbut to African people, for Morocco is a country that once refused to host the African Cup of Nations on flimsy grounds that Moroccans would be infected by African teams bringing in Ebola virus
Some African heads claim that the admission of Morocco will now resolve the question of  Western Sahara`s occupation. Such argument is always pushed with some foreign machination. In fact Morocco is now emboldened. That is why those who voted for readmission of Morocco should have demanded an end to the illegal occupation as a precondition.
That did not happen at the AU Summit meeting in Addis Ababa. Instead we see the AU blatantly violating its own Constitutive Act, and the principle for African countries to respect each other`s territorial boundaries
We witness a violation of both the AU and the UN declarations on the inalienable right of the people of  Western Sahara to independence and self-determinationto independence and self-determination
Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of Sahrawi people are disenfranchised. It is estimated that up to 200,000 have fled to refugee camps in the neighbouring Algeria and Mauritania. They are separated by a 2700 km long wall going through  Western Sahara, surrounded by landmines,

The Number Of Anti-Muslim Hate Groups On The Rise In US

Abdus Sattar Ghazali


The number of anti-Muslim hate groups nearly tripled from 34 in 2015 to 101 in 2016. That’s just one of the dramatic statistics in a new report by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
This annual count from the SPLC includes groups like the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis and other white nationalists, along with anti-government patriot groups and anti-LGBT groups. The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Senior Fellow, Mark Potok, says their numbers have consistently been on the rise since about 2000. The radical right out there is booming. The number of hate groups rose from 892 groups in 2015 to 917 last year.
According to Mark Potok more and more, people on the radical right don’t connect directly with hate groups but instead lurk on the internet until they decide action is needed. A good example, he pointed out, is mass murderer Dylann Roof, who killed nine African-Americans in a South Carolina church in 2015 and apparently did not have direct contact with hate groups or white supremacists.
The Washington Post pointed out that the new arrivals to the 2016 SPLC list included white nationalist groups such as the campus-based Identity Evropa in California and the 29 clubs created by the popular neo-Nazi Daily Stormer website, which changed its masthead from “The World’s Most Visited Alt-Right Web Site” to “America’s #1 Most-Trusted Republican News Source” the day after the election.
The SPLC has seen repeatedly over the years how rhetoric from figures like presidential candidates and others in the public eye can fuel that kind of hatred and violence, says Stephen Piggott of SPLC.  Several years ago, the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding came up with similar findings in a study. It found that spikes in anti-Muslim sentiment typically occur during election cycles — not so much in the aftermath of Islamist terror attacks, as many had assumed.
There’s little doubt that certain politicians and activists like Brigitte Gabriel are feeding the fires of hatred and religious violence. And President-elect Trump’s appointments of anti-Muslim ideologues suggest that that will continue. But the convergence of the Patriot movement, which has been marked by political violence since first emerging in the 1990s, and the anti-Muslim movement that has surged more recently, is creating serious dangers of its own. While Patriots may see a White House ally in Trump — and therefore lose some of their animus toward the federal government — they are finding new enemies in Islam.
Tellingly, on Thursday, five vandalism cases were reported by Howard County in Maryland; in two incidents the name “Trump” was spray-painted on vehicles. One of the families whose vehicle was vandalized identifies as Hispanic, and family members are concerned that they were targeted because of their national origin, even though they are legal residents.
“This is one more disturbing example of the impact that the current administration’s decisions and policies are having on ordinary Americans,” said the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Maryland Outreach Manager Dr. Zainab Chaudry. “We encourage law enforcement authorities to conduct a swift and thorough investigation and bring the perpetrators to justice.”
CAIR, America’s largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization, has noted an unprecedented spike in hate incidents targeting American Muslims and other minority groups since the election of President Donald Trump.
Attempt to crush Muslim civil advocacy organizations
According to AlterNet News, a new initiative advanced by right-wing Republicans in Congress and reportedly backed by the Trump administration puts American Muslim civil society groups in the government’s crosshairs. Without the same outraged protests or condemnatory press conferences inspired by Trump’s travel ban targeting visitors and dual citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries, the lesser-known effort is aimed at crushing robust Muslim civil society organizing in the United States, using the framework of the war on terror.
The initiative aims to declare the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, a designation that in practice, is likely to provide a vehicle for a network of anti-Muslim crusaders to hound unaffiliated, mainstream Muslim organizations and potentially criminalize their leadership, the AlterNet said adding:
“The effort emanates from fringe conspiracy theorists who, backed by a well-heeled Islamophobia industry, espouse the unfounded claim that the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the far reaches of the U.S. government. These fringe figures charge that prominent political players, from Huma Abedin to Grover Norquist to Keith Ellison, are operating as secret agents of the organization.”
Arjun Singh Sethi, a civil rights lawyer and professor at Georgetown University Law Center, told AlterNet that this effort represents “version 2.0 of the Muslim ban and will be used as a vehicle to attack and smear Muslim civic and political organizations in the United States. The $57 million Islamophobia industry will do anything in its power to arbitrarily and erroneously link groups in the United States to the Muslim Brotherhood. These accusations alone can destroy reputations and tarnish organizations forever.”
According to Stephen Piggott of the SLPC, the White House is reportedly weighing options to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, according to several news outlets. Such a move would amount to a powerful policy win for America’s anti-Muslim movement, whose leaders have worked tirelessly to smear American Muslim civil rights organizations, in particular the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), by calling them  “fronts” for the Brotherhood.
Pressure from the anti-Muslim movement for this designation has only increased since the election, Piggott said and added: A new coalition of mostly anti-Muslim religious figures, dubbed “Faith Leaders of America,” descended upon the National Press Club the day before Trump’s inauguration to implore him to take action on the Muslim Brotherhood. Part of the coalition’s “call to prayer” read, “When you label the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, we support you.”

This January, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart and Sen. Ted Cruz introduced the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act in both congressional chambers.

How Norway Avoided Becoming A Fascist State

George Lakey


Donald Trump’s obvious affection for authoritarians is prompting worried comparisons of our polarized country to the polarized Germany of the 1920s and ’30s. Since I’m known to see in polarization both crisis and opportunity, my friends are asking me these days about Hitler, the worst-case scenario.
I grant the possibility of the United States going fascist, but argue that will not happen if we choose the practical steps taken by progressive Nordic social movements when they faced dangerous polarization. Consider the Norwegians, who experienced extreme polarization at the same time as the Germans did.
The Norwegian economic elite organized against striking laborers and produced a polarized country that included both Nazi Brown Shirts goose-stepping in the streets and Norwegian Communists agitating to overthrow capitalism. Many Norwegians were flattered by the Nazi belief that the tall, blue-eyed blonde was the pinnacle of human development. Others vehemently denounced the racism underlying such beliefs.
The politician Vidkun Quisling, an admirer of Hitler, organized in 1933 a Nazi party, and its uniformed paramilitary wing sought to provoke violent clashes with leftist students. But progressive movements of farmers and workers, joined by middle class allies, launched nonviolent direct action campaigns that made the country increasingly un-governable by the economic elite.
Quisling reportedly held discussions with military officers about a possible coup d’etat. The stage was set for a fascist “solution.”
Instead, Norway broke through to a social democracy. The majority forced the economic elite to take a back seat and invented a new economy with arguably the most equality, individual freedom, and shared abundance the developed world has known.
The key to avoiding fascism? An organized left with a strong vision and broad support.
In some ways Norway and Germany were similar: predominantly Christian, racially homogeneous, and suffering hugely in the Great Depression. But Germany’s workers movement failed to make common cause with family farmers, unlike Norway’s alliance. The German left was also split terribly within itself: Communist vs. Social Democratic.
The split was over vision for the new society. One side demanded abolition of capitalism, and the other side proposed partial accommodation. They were unwilling to compromise, and then, when the Social Democrats took power, armed rebellion and bloody repression followed. The result was the Third Reich.
Meanwhile in Norway, the Norwegian Workers’ Party crafted a vision that seemed both radical and reasonable and won majority support for their view despite the dissent of a very small Communist Party. Grassroots movements built a large infrastructure of co-ops that showed their competency and positivity when the government and political conservatives lacked both. Additionally, activists reached beyond the choir, inviting participation from people who initially feared making large changes.
Norwegians also took a different attitude toward violence. They chose nonviolent direct action campaigns consisting of strikes, boycotts, demonstrations, and occupations—a far less fearsome picture than Nazi Brown Shirts and street fighting. Norway therefore lacked the dangerous chaos that in Germany led the middle classes to accept the elite’s choice of Hitler to bring “law and order.”
The Norwegian set of strategies—vision, co-ops, outreach, and nonviolent direct action campaigns—is within the American skill set.
The Movement for Black Lives recently proposed a new vision for the United States that is attracting attention for the scope of its agenda, its commitment to inclusion, and fresh strategic thinking. The Black Lives movement showed its commitment to coalition-building when it gathered in solidarity at Standing Rock this fall, connecting two massive progressive movements. Standing Rock showed the world march by march how nonviolent direct action campaigns win hearts and minds. And Bernie Sanders’ gift to electoral politics is an inspired, energized, unified movement built around the desire for economic equality and opportunity. He pulled people from the right as well as the left. The election is spurring many more people to be involved in struggle, and infrastructure like co-ops are prospering. Polarization is nothing to despair over. It’s just a signal that it’s time for progressives to start organizing.

Federal reserve report reveals exploding levels of US household debt

Tom Hall 

US household debt surged by $460 billion last year, the sharpest one-year rise in nearly a decade, according to a report released last week by the New York Federal Reserve.
Total US household debt now stands at $12.58 trillion, almost as much in nominal terms as right before the 2008 financial crisis, which was triggered by the failure of the mortgage-backed securities market. The Fed’s report anticipates that this level will be surpassed sometime this year.
Media reports have attempted to downplay the significance of the report by pointing to the fact that delinquencies and the share of personal disposable income swallowed up by debt servicing, as well as the level of household debt relative to GDP, remain well below their pre-recession levels. Fortune magazine, for example, pointed out that the household debt to GDP ratio is roughly 79 percent, the lowest level since 2002.
However, the growth of household debt, as well as the particular kinds of debt Americans are taking on, demonstrate the ongoing economic stagnation for tens of millions of workers and young people. It is highly symptomatic that debt levels skyrocketed last year while US GDP grew at the lowest rate in five years, only 1.6 percent. Growth since the official end of the recession in 2009 has been the lowest for any official economic recovery since the end of World War II.
For the vast majority of the population, the recovery has not brought a return to pre-recession economic conditions. This is because what economic growth has occurred since the recession has been predicated upon the intensified exploitation of the working class, manifested above all in a shift towards a low-wage, casual workforce.
Joblessness among the working-age population remains at high levels, masked by an official unemployment rate which does not count workers who have given up looking for jobs altogether. Those jobs which have been added since the recession are far more likely to be low-wage or part-time than the jobs wiped out by the recession.
Younger workers have been particularly hard hit: 18-34 year olds today make 20 percent less than in 1989, and 1 million young people faced long-term unemployment in the aftermath of the recession, according to a report last month by Young Invincibles.
The recent rise in debt has been driven primarily by student loans and auto loans, which together accounted for roughly $2.5 trillion in the fourth quarter of 2016. This is in sharp contrast to pre-recession debt levels, which were dominated by housing debt. New housing debt has plummeted from a decade ago by more than half, from $700 billion to $300 billion. While mortgages and home equity still make up an absolute majority of total household debt, the share has declined from 79 to 71 percent.
The rise in student loan debt is due, in the first place, to skyrocketing costs of attending American universities. Since the 2001-2002 school year, the average annual cost of attending a public four-year university rose from $12,250 to $20,090, with even higher increases for private universities, according to the College Board. Student loan debt exploded over the same period, increasing sixfold from $200 billion in 2003 to $1.3 trillion last year.
However, this has been compounded by the fact that, since the 2008 recession, millions of young people have chosen to defer entering the job market in favor of going to college due to poor employment opportunities. Upon graduating, however, they are saddled with debt which greatly diminishes the added value of their degrees.
At the same time, young people are taking on less of other kinds of debt, especially mortgages and other forms of housing debt, due to dire financial constraints. A Pew Research Center report last year found that 18-34 year olds were more likely to live with their parents than any other form of living arrangement for the first time since 1880. At the same time, median net wealth among college graduates with student debt has plummeted, from $86,500 in the 1980s to $6,600 in 2014.
While debt delinquency in general remains down from pre-recession highs, due in part to sharp decreases in subprime mortgage lending, delinquencies among auto loans, the other major source of new debt, surged to an eight-year high. Some $23.27 billion worth of car loans were delinquent for a month or more during the fourth quarter of 2016.
These figures come amid mounting signs of a potential slowdown in the global auto industry. GM, the largest American automaker, relied on profits from North America, where new car purchases have been propped up by low interest rates, to offset stagnant or declining profits from China, South America and Europe. Meanwhile, the number of unsold vehicles held by American dealers rose by one-third to 845,000 vehicles by the end of 2016.
There are concerns among economists that a collapse in the auto loan bubble could pose systemic risks to the global economy, similar to the subprime mortgage crisis in 2008.