Behind the UK government attack on “health tourism”

Richard Tyler

Earlier this month, Britain’s right-wing tabloid press screamed about the damage “health tourism” was doing to the National Health Service (NHS).

The Express, owned by soft-porn millionaire Richard Desmond, fulminated against “Health Tourism Outrage.” The pro-Conservative Daily Mail proclaimed, “Health tourism ‘chaos’ draining the NHS,” quoting “Whitehall research” that “puts the cost to taxpayers of health tourism at anywhere between £200 million and £2 billion a year.”

Rupert Murdoch’s Sun plumbed new depths, condemning a supposed “£500k health tourist,” who in fact was an expectant mother, returning to Nigeria from the US when she experienced complications and had to be taken to hospital from Heathrow.

The Daily Mail wrote of the woman, “A hospital in Luton is chasing a £350,000 bill racked up by a Nigerian mother,” saying the “shocking figure exposes the scale of abuse of the crumbling NHS by health tourists.”

The mother was subjected to this inhumane treatment by the Mail hate sheet, despite it being forced to acknowledge: “The woman had been transferred from another hospital nearby due to complications during the pregnancy and the babies spent two months on the paediatric intensive care unit.” The local NHS Trust was cited as saying that it could not refuse treatment “if there was a danger to life.”

The Sun attacked NHS staff too, in an article headlined, “Shocking health tourism abuse exposed”—for allegedly bringing their relatives to Britain for free treatment.

The headlines were prompted by Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt announcing that the government planned to collect £500 million a year from so-called “health tourists,” following publication of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee report “NHS treatment for overseas patients.”

Nowhere to be found in the lurid press coverage was the fact that the £500 million the Tories are seeking to obtain represents under 0.5 percent of the current NHS budget of £107 billion.

As the footnotes of the parliamentary report attest, the much reported “£2 billion a year” the NHS is said to be losing to “health tourists” turns out to be a completely made-up figure. It is not based on any scientific examination of actual costs that might be chargeable under the current rules.

The report asserts as a fact: “The research also estimated that the total cost to the NHS of treating people who were not ordinarily resident in this country was around £2 billion.” However, the footnote for this statement refers to another document by the National Audit Office, in which a further footnote about the figure points out, “There is significant uncertainty about the amounts that are potentially chargeable.”

In oral evidence to the committee, the senior civil servant at the Department of Health, Permanent Secretary Chris Wormald, said the £2 billion figure was a “very rough estimate” from which “we came to the figure of £500 million as the chargeable amount.”

When pressed on how the figure of £500 million had been arrived at, Wormald said it was “based on a series of assumptions about the number of people here” [i.e., in the UK].

To implement the government’s proposal means turning doctors and other medical staff into border guards, whose responsibilities would include checking the immigration status of those they are meant to treat.

For the Tory government, this initiative has absolutely nothing to do with the money that might be recoverable from overseas visitors for receiving health treatment in the UK. Blaming foreigners, immigrants and asylum seekers for the dire state of the National Health Service, which has been eviscerated by tens of billions of pounds in cuts since 2010, has long been a staple of government propaganda—faithfully repeated by their media echo chamber. This whipping up of nationalism is now being ramped up, as a central element of the government’s Brexit agenda.

The attack on “health tourists” is vital in diverting the public’s attention from the ruling elite’s plans to completely gut the NHS, turning over those elements that could turn a profit to the private sector. Moreover, scapegoating foreign “health tourists” is just a prelude to introducing charges throughout the NHS for everyone for such routine matters as GP visits.

In the last months, a number of developments point to the dire situation already confronting the NHS.

* Sustainability and Transformation Plans: These mark a significant step towards the dismantling of the NHS. Their aim is to exacerbate the crisis in health care to the point of collapse in order to justify wholesale privatisation.

* Spending Cuts: The Tories are imposing £22 billion in “efficiency savings” on the NHS by 2020. In 2018-19 NHS spending per person in England will go down in real terms. This prompted the chief executive of NHS England to say “let’s not pretend that’s not placing huge pressure on the service.”

* Staff shortages: In England, 96 percent or 214 out of 224 acute hospitals operated without an adequate level of nursing staff during day shifts last October, while 85 percent of them did not have the right staff levels on nightshifts. According to Janet Davies, chief executive of the Royal College of Nursing, “There are already at least 24,000 nursing vacancies in the UK and it’s getting worse every day.”

* Closure of Accident & Emergency Departments: 24 A&E units could face closure over the next four years—seven units have been already identified, and a further 17 face an uncertain future.

Those immediately at risk include departments in East London, West Bromwich and Birmingham. Others threatened include Dewsbury and District Hospital and Huddersfield Royal Infirmary in West Yorkshire, Poole Hospital in Dorset, Southport and Warrington hospitals on Merseyside, Darlington Memorial and University Hospital of North Tees, Southend University Hospital and Broomfield Hospital in Essex.

This would represent the closure or downgrading of 14 percent of England’s “type one” emergency units—those that are consultant-led and offer comprehensive 24-hour services. The effect would be to send emergency cases to a smaller number of units. Dr. Chris Moulton, vice president of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, said, “Even hospitals that could cope with a large increase in emergency attendances do not have sufficient bed numbers or other facilities to care for the accompanying surge in admitted patients.”

The “urgent care centres” that would replace some of the A&E departments would only offer a limited service and would not have the wide range of medical expertise or equipment available in Accident & Emergency units.

With mass job cuts looming, German union pits Bombardier workers against one another

Dietmar Henning 

The Canadian aircraft and train manufacturer Bombardier is planning new job cuts, including the possible closure of factories in Germany. The country’s largest union, IG Metall, and the works councils are pitting factories against each other to facilitate the company’s downsizing plans.

The plant in Görlitz in east Germany, with over 2,300 employees, is particularly threatened. Bombardier Transportation plans to limit production at the plant to aluminum passenger car bodies, according to a recent Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung interview with Michael Fohrer, the chairman of the German division. In Hennigsdorf, hundreds of job cuts imperil the production of the company’s prototypes. The site in Bautzen, on the other hand, is to be developed into an “industrial control center” for the mass production of trains, at a cost of 20 million euros.

The job cuts are part of a second worldwide round of redundancies, involving the loss of another 7,500 jobs. In February and March last year, Bombardier announced it would cut 7,000 jobs worldwide.

For months production at the Görlitz plant has been systematically reduced. Previously double-decker trains and parts for the new ICE 4 train were produced there, including engineering, interior finishing, steel and aluminum parts. The concentration on the production of aluminum car bodies is a major blow, which is the writing on the wall for the complete closure of the factory. According to the works councils, demand has shifted from aluminum to steel and stainless steel trains.

Fohrer blamed international competition for the job cuts. The company has more than 61 factories in 26 countries but Asian and Eastern European companies were increasingly bidding for contracts, he said, and this was depressing price levels due to their lower labor costs and higher government subsidies. In addition, big customers, he said, had demanded that production and service of finished products take place in their own countries.

The company’s aviation division has suffered major losses in recent years, adding pressure to reduce costs in the transportation division. The division’s pre-tax profits were $465 million in 2015, while the aviation sector lost over $5 billion.

The solution, Fohrer said, lies in a “specialization of sites as development and production centers”, and the transition from “order-specific design and production” to the cost-saving “modular principle”. Under this scheme, several varieties of trains are built from the same train type or module, depending on whether they will be used as commuter, regional express trains, etc. In addition, Fohrer said automation and digitization had to be brought up to date. “We want to implement the industry change 4.0”, he said.

He could not give any long-term prognosis on factory closures, Fohrer said, adding that any such speculation would be “untrustworthy”.

Job cuts and possible closures are not restricted to east Germany. Locomotive engineering, which was discontinued in Görlitz last year, is also to be terminated at the company’s plants in Poland, Switzerland and Italy. It will be concentrated, at least temporarily, in Mannheim, Germany.

Fearing slowdowns or other forms of resistance, Fohrer said he wants to ensure that existing orders are completed before announcing the final restructuring plan in July. In the meantime, management is relying on IG Metall and the company works councils to force workers into a bidding war over who will sacrifice more to keep their jobs.

At the same time workers are not prepared to wait until the closure of the plant is announced. “All the signals point to storm”, declared René Straube, the chairman of the works council in Gorlitz. “To take away our production of the steel shell is a deadly blow”.

In mid-January, Sigmar Gabriel (Social Democratic Party-SPD), the former economics minister, the premiers of Brandenburg and Saxony and works council and union officials met with Bombardier management. All sides then sought to downplay the announcement and sow complacency among workers.

The main role of the union and works councils is to allow the company’s plan to be implemented without a “storm”. IG Metall leader for East Saxony, Jan Otto, instructing workers not to strike during a general meeting of IGM members in January and swept aside demands by workers for a fight.

The company joint works council delivered its own restructuring proposal, under the title “Timetable Zu(g)kunft” (Train- Future), to management. The basic premise is that the company is facing a “financial slump” and changes must be implemented. One works council member from Görlitz told the WSWS, “There is already a small internal competition taking place”.

In fact, the “Timetable Zu(g)kunft” is already leading to fierce competition with the works councils playing off plants against one another. They all praise their own factory as the most cost-effective, hardworking and competitive. To prevent falling into disrepute with management, the works councils vehemently oppose any serious measures to defend workers’ jobs.

The unions and work councils are not opposed to layoffs and plant closings in principle. They only ask that they be the ones to enforce factory closures and job cuts—through their own methods. One of these is slashing workforces via “social plans”, severance payments, early retirement or the sacking of temporary workers. “There will be no compulsory redundancies!” declared IGM functionary Otto, making it clear the union will help implement the jobs cuts but wants to sell them as “voluntary” instead.

The bankruptcy of this policy was strikingly revealed with the closure of the GM-Opel plant in Bochum in late 2014. GM and its labor “partners” presented the closure of the Bochum plant and, before that, in Antwerp, Belgium, as necessary to save remaining jobs. Now GM has floated plans to sell Opel-Vauxhall to Peugeot-Citroën (PSA), which would threaten the jobs of tens of thousands of workers in Great Britain, France, Germany and other countries.

IG Metall is now involved various stunts to present itself as the champion of the workers in Görlitz. To let off a little steam IG Metall has called for a demonstration in the town on 4 March. As far as the union bureaucracy is concerned the protest will be a kiss of death to the workers at the plant. A fight can be taken up but it cannot be left in the hands of the unions and works councils—it is up to rank-and-file workers themselves.

German army announces major expansion as tanks roll into Eastern Europe

Johannes Stern

In a comment in the Süddeutsche Zeitung one week ago the German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen (CDU) announced a massive increase in the country’s military budget and new international operations to be carried out by the Bundeswehr (German Army). She subsequently announced that the size of the Bundeswehr will increase to almost 200,000 soldiers in the next few years. At present, the total number of active soldiers is around 178,000.

An official press release from the Ministry of Defense stated Tuesday that “a demand has been established for a further 5,000 military posts, 1,000 civilian posts and 500 additional reservists over the next seven years.” The “target for the Bundeswehr up to 2024” would “be increased to a total of 198,000 soldiers with about 61,400 posts for civilian employees.”

In May last year Von de Leyen announced a so-called “Trend Change of Personnel” involving a gradual increase in staffing. At the beginning of December this was followed by the new “Personnel Strategy of the Bundeswehr.” Following the election of US President Donald Trump, the German government’s demands for rearmament and war have become increasingly aggressive.

The latest press release states: “The Bundeswehr must be able to respond appropriately to foreign and security policy influences at all times.” The aim of the “Trend Change of Personnel” is to “increase the capacity of the Bundeswehr, strengthen its robustness and build up important future capabilities.”

Overall “99 individual measures are planned to increase the efficiency of the Bundeswehr.” These included, among others, “specialists in the new organizational area, cyber and information space, crews for the Korvetten K 130, strengthening the support forces of armed force bases (logistics/ABC defense)” and “setting up a 6th tank battalion.”

There is no doubt that the Bundeswehr is preparing for war. Why else the massive investment in personnel and equipment? “The Bundeswehr is required like never before”, Ursula von der Leyen stated in a press release. “The fight against IS terrorism, the stabilization of Mali, continued support for Afghanistan, human smuggling in the Mediterranean and the Aegean, or our considerable presence for NATO in the Baltic States.”

Significantly, on the same day, the Defense Ministry announced the transfer of heavy equipment and other combat groups to the Russian border. “20 Martens and six Leopard battle tanks as well as three mountain tanks are on the way to Lithuania,” according to a report on the official web site of the Bundeswehr. In all, approximately 120 containers and 200 vehicles have been loaded since mid-January and transported to Lithuania by a total of nine trains. By the end of the week the rest of the 450 soldiers are due to leave on their way to lead a NATO battlegroup of a total of 1,000 men.

The transfer of NATO troops to Eastern Europe—further battle groups are being set up in Estonia (under the leadership of Great Britain), Latvia (Canada) and Poland (US)—is part of the campaign to escalate NATO’s conflict with Russia, decided in July 2016 at the NATO summit in Warsaw. This includes the establishment of a NATO missile defense system in Romania and Poland, the creation of a 5,000-strong Rapid Reaction Force and an increase in the NATO Response Force from 13,000 to at least 40,000 soldiers.

Media outlets such as German weekly Der Spiegel justify “the largest deployment of troops to the east since the end of the Cold War” and the posting of the first German battalion to Eastern Europe since the destruction wrought by the Wehrmacht (the German army under Nazism) in the Soviet Union in the Second World War as “a reaction to the take over of Ukrainian Crimea by Russia.”

This turns the facts upside down. The real aggressor is NATO, not Moscow. Prior to the integration of Crimea into Russia in March 2014, Washington and Berlin had organized a putsch against the pro-Russian Yanukovich government in close collaboration with extreme right-wing forces. Since then, NATO has been exacerbating the situation and using the predominantly defensive response of Moscow as a pretense to systematically upgrade its forces and step up military pressure against Russia.

A recent comment in the Tagesspiegel titled “Nuclear weapons against Russia: Germany needs nuclear weapons” made clear how far sections of the German elites are prepared to go. Maximilian Terhalle, a political scientist at the University of Hagen and former security policy advisor in the Defence Ministry, said: “A Germany… that wants to limit the power of Putin’s Russia in order to maintain an independent Europe, which maintains our domestic and foreign-policy room for action, must do so militarily and therefore also with nuclear weapons.”

Terhalle justifies his nuclear great power fantasies by pointing to Trump’s “pro-Russian course” and what he said were the defective arsenals of the “two security council members” France and Great Britain. These were “too small, too tactile, and partly obsolete” and could not “provide a comprehensive deterrent.” Moreover, in the event of an emergency, one can not simply rely on the fact that the stronger partner (for example the UK) guarantees nuclear (protection) for [Germany] and nuclear offence against Russia.” In “a worst-case scenario,” Germany “must be able to stand up for itself.” This is what “it owes to its people.”

One wonders about the sanity of people like Terhalle. As an alleged “security adviser,” he should be well aware that a “worst-case scenario”—that is, a nuclear war with Russia—has the potential not only to wipe out the German population, but eradicate the entire human race. Workers and youth must take such comments seriously. Seventy-five years after the end of the Second World War, the German ruling class is again preparing to commit terrible crimes in order to impose its geostrategic and economic interests throughout the world.

US anti-immigrant witch-hunt leads asylum seekers to make perilous trek to Canada

Roger Jordan

Since Donald Trump’s election as US president last November and particularly since the beginning of the year, increasing numbers of refugees are fleeing the US for Canada. To do so, many are making perilous journeys through snow-laden fields, in frigid temperatures.

The Trump administration and its anti-immigrant witch-hunt are responsible for the refugees’ plight. So too is Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government. If refugee claimants are being forced to cross into Canada using fields and seldom-traveled back roads, it is because the Trudeau government has instructed the Canada Border Services Agency to continue to enforce the reactionary Canada-US “Safe Third Country Agreement” and deny them entry if they try to enter Canada at a border crossing.

The number of asylum seekers crossing from the US states of New York, Vermont and Maine into Quebec in January was up more than ten-fold from two years ago. While only 42 made the crossing in January 2015, last month the figure was 452.

A network of smugglers has sprung up, charging up to $1,000 per head to take families from New York and other cities to the Canadian border.

Since January, hundreds, often in groups of a dozen or more, have trekked along frozen rivers and fields to reach Manitoba from Minnesota and North Dakota. Many have made the trip without winter clothing and in temperatures of -20 degrees Celsius (minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit). Some have lost fingers due to frostbite.

Most of the refugees entering Canada from the US fled war, poverty and persecution in their native Africa. But the asylum seekers also include people from Latin America and other impoverished parts of the world.

The Trump administration launched a brutal witch-hunt against refugees and immigrants, with Muslims a special target, almost from the day it took office. The President has vowed to deport up to 3 million immigrants and already authorized mass deportation raids and vastly expanded the grounds on which people can be deported. He is also preparing a new executive order to re-impose the ban on refugees, immigrants and visitors traveling to the US from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Yesterday, in a further indication of the draconian character of the assault his administration is mounting on undocumented immigrants, Trump referred to it as a “military operation.”

The Canadian government’s response to the spike in asylum seekers has been a combination of callous indifference and outright hostility. New arrivals are being forced to rely on private charity to obtain the basic necessities of life, with many organizations reporting that they are already running short of supplies.

Under conditions where the US is openly violating its obligations to refugees and refugee-claimants under international law and asylum seekers are putting their lives at risk to reach Canada, the Liberal government has said it will not raise Canada’s pitifully low refugee quota for 2017.

More significant still is the Liberals’ staunch defence of the 2002 “Safe Third Country Agreement” with the United States. Under this agreement, any asylum seeker who enters Canada from the US at a border checkpoint is denied entry and the right to make a claim for refugee status in Canada and immediately returned to the US.

It is this that is causing people fleeing the US for Canada to choose high-risk routes to enter the country. Those who cross the border at an unauthorized point and subsequently file asylum claims are not automatically returned to the US. Canadian authorities can, however, later argue against granting them asylum on the grounds that they should have applied for refugee status in the US.

More than 200 legal scholars and refugee advocacy groups have called on the government to scrap, or at the very least suspend, the “Safe Third Country Agreement,” citing Trump’s anti-immigrant measures. But the government, with Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen, who came to Canada as a 16-year-old Somali refugee serving as its frontman, has callously refused to do so.

When asked in parliament earlier this month about his government’s response to the spike in asylum seekers, Trudeau made clear that the plight of the refugees is the last of his concerns.

“We need,” declared Trudeau, “to make sure that we are protecting the integrity of the Canadian border, the strength of our immigration and refugee system, and demonstrating that we are there for the security of communities and individuals.”

The Trudeau government’s refusal to assist those desperately seeking to escape Trump’s deportation dragnet underscores the hypocritical and fraudulent character of the Liberals’ posturing as “refugee-friendly.” In the 2015 election, Trudeau sought to appeal to popular anger against the Harper Conservative government by making calibrated attacks on its whipping up of Islamophobia and its depiction of Syrian refugees as a grave threat to Canadian security.

Trudeau has since been promoted by the likes of the New York Times and the British Guardian as something of a poster boy for international liberalism because his government accepted 25,000 Syrian refugees into Canada in its first months in office. Not only is this a drop in the bucket given the millions displaced by the war in Syria, but Ottawa refused to accept any single men and worked with the US Department of Homeland Security to screen those it did allow in. Moreover, the majority were privately sponsored by churches and other charities, meaning that the government provided no support for them.

Last but not least, the Liberals used their “pro-refugee” stance as political cover for increasing Canada’s role in the US-led Mideast War. Yet it is the wars Washington has mounted over the past quarter-century, with Canadian imperialism’s support and participation, in the Middle East, Afghanistan and the Balkans, that have laid waste to entire societies, producing the greatest refugee crisis since the Second World War.

There are two reasons the Liberals are so adamant about upholding the “Safe Third Country Agreement.” First, Trudeau’s cynical tweets about Canada being “open” notwithstanding, they do not want to encourage asylum seekers to seek refuge in Canada. All the more so under conditions where Trump’s brutal measures could cause many to look to Canada for refuge.

Second and even more importantly, Trudeau and his government are determined to forge a close working relationship with the Trump administration and, therefore, don’t want to cause it any embarrassment or be seen to criticize it.

Earlier this month, Trudeau visited Trump at the White House and reaffirmed the longstanding Canada-US military-strategic partnership. Their joint statement pledged Canada to collaborate even more closely in US-led imperialist interventions around the globe and to forge a protectionist trade bloc under Washington’s leadership aimed at offloading the capitalist crisis onto Washington and Ottawa’s economic and geopolitical rivals.

During his Washington trip, Trudeau studiously avoided making any direct comment about Trump’s ruthless crackdown on immigrants. When, at their joint press conference, the US president launched into a full-throated defence of his 120-day suspension of all refugee claims and his discriminatory ban on persons from seven Muslim countries entering the US, Trudeau remained silent.

Canada’s Conservatives and other right-wing forces are seeking to exploit the refugee issue to foment reaction. Predictably, the Conservatives have launched a xenophobic campaign, denouncing asylum seekers for entering Canada “illegally” and demanding that the government do more to “defend” Canada’s borders.

Such claims deliberately seek to scapegoat refugees for problems that have been created by Canada’s brutal refugee policies. If asylum seekers are being forced to enter the country “illegally,” it is precisely because of the draconian anti-immigrant measures imposed by the former Conservative government and upheld by the Liberals, including the Trudeau government’s refusal to cancel the “Safe Third Country Agreement.”

The discovery of a system with seven “Earth-like” exoplanets

Bryan Dyne

The detection of a nearby solar system of potentially Earth-like exoplanets orbiting the star Trappist-1 has evoked widespread public interest and enthusiasm. Millions of people have read reports, watched videos and posted on social media about the seven worlds that might have liquid water on their surfaces.

The Trappist-1 system is comprised of seven planets that orbit a nearby ultracool dwarf star (so-called for its comparatively low temperature). Six of the planets have been confirmed to have an Earth-like size, mass and density. None of them have any hydrogen in their atmospheres, further confirmation that these are all terrestrial, rocky worlds like Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars. Moreover, due to the gravitational interactions between all seven planets and Trappist-1 itself, every world in the system may have liquid water.

Of particular interest is the fact that the planets are very close. They are Earth’s next-door neighbors, relative to the vastness of the universe. Trappist-1 is only 39 light years away—that is, it takes light, traveling at about 300,000 kilometers per second, 39 years to travel the distance. In comparison, the Milky Way galaxy of which our sun is a part has a diameter of 100,000 light years, and it is about 2.5 million light years to its larger companion, the Andromeda galaxy, one of trillions of galaxies in the Universe.

An artist's rendering of the seven worlds of the Trappist-1 system, shown to scale in both size and distance, as might be seen from Earth with a future telescope. Credit: NASA, JPL-Caltech, Spitzer Space Telescope, Robert Hurt (Spitzer, Caltech)

The planets are so close that, in the not-too-distant future, it should be possible to make far more detailed analyses and even direct observations of exoplanets.

The discovery of these worlds is the most remarkable of a wave of new scientific findings since the first “exoplanet”—a planet outside of our solar system—was discovered around a Sun-like star in the mid-1990s. At the time, while exoplanets had been predicted for nearly four centuries, none had been conclusively detected, let alone directly observed.

Advances in measuring techniques and the use of instruments placed in the orbit around Earth, free of the distortions of the atmosphere, made it possible to detect very slight dips in the brightness of stars. When those dips were observed with regularity, they could be attributed to the motion of planets across the line of sight between the star and the observers.

When the first detection occurred, it opened a whole new realm of astronomy. The gravitational effects of these unseen planets could also be studied, providing evidence of their mass, density and other physical characteristics. Today, not only have scientists detected more than 3,400 exoplanets, the knowledge built up over the past 20 years makes it possible to visualize what these worlds might look like, either from space or from the surface. And with the launching of the James Webb Space Telescope next year, it should be possible to make far more detailed analysis and even direct observation of exoplanets.

Like most significant astronomical advances, the planets’ discovery was an international endeavor. The detection of exoplanets around Trappist-1 began in May 2016, when a team of astronomers used the Chile-based Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope (TRAPPIST), remotely operated from Belgium and Switzerland, to first observe the star. They discovered three Earth-sized planets orbiting it, with the outermost one likely within the star’s habitable zone.

This encouraged further observations, which were conducted by a series of ground-based telescopes located in Chile, Hawaii, Morocco, Spain and South Africa. The Spitzer Space Telescope was also commissioned to use its higher precision and greater ability to see in the infrared to study the system. When it was discovered that the system had not three, but seven planets, the Hubble Space Telescope was employed to do an initial survey of the planetary atmospheres for hydrogen. Astronomers across Africa, Europe, the Middle East, North America, South America and Southeast Asia coordinated their efforts to make sense of the data.

The discovery of a planetary system around Trappist-1 is not merely a piece of luck. It is the confirmation of a scientific hypothesis, first advanced in 1997, that, due to the physics of stellar formation, stars with about a tenth of the mass of the Sun are more likely to have terrestrial-sized planets. Trappist-1 is one of many candidates to be studied using this hypothesis, and the first for which the idea has been borne out.

This scientific breakthrough is the culmination of several centuries of advances in astronomy and physics: the understanding of how solar systems are formed; the analysis of visible light and other forms of electromagnetic radiation; and mathematical methods of analysis used to discover the subtle signals in the data from stellar observations.

Trappist-1 is a demonstration of the power of human cognition, science and reason. It is a powerful rebuke to the incessant contemporary glorification of irrationalism, whether through the cultivation of backwardness and religious prejudice or the promotion of postmodernism and its rejection of objective truth, and a mighty vindication of the materialist understanding of the world, that there are objective laws of nature and that humans can comprehend them.

Among millions of people inspired by such discoveries, there is an instinctive understanding that the methods employed to find the Trappist-1 planets and make other scientific and technical advances should be used to solve social and economic problems, to provide sufficient health care, education, shelter or food for all humanity. How can our society discover seven potentially Earth-like worlds more than 350 trillion kilometers away, yet proceed, through environmental recklessness and nuclear-armed militarism, to destroy the planet on which we live?

The exoplanet discovery was based on collaboration towards a common goal whose driving force was the pursuit of knowledge, not the amassing of insane amounts of personal wealth. This sort of thinking is totally alien to the world’s ruling elite, which flaunts its backwardness, vulgarity, ignorance and parasitism, personified in the figure of Donald Trump.

This discovery highlights another contradiction of modern society. The organization and planning required to produce these results is a testament to humanity’s ability to rationally and scientifically coordinate resources on an international scale. The scientists on the project also had to reject the constant mantra of national chauvinism, espoused by the ruling elites throughout the world. While science probes the seemingly infinite distances of galactic space, humanity remains trapped at home within the prison house of the nation-state system, with barbed-wire fences, wars, invasions, bombings and mass flights of refugees.

The squandering of trillions of dollars, yuan, yen and euros to enrich a parasitic capitalist elite and to wage war around the globe is one reason why scientific announcements of this order are so rare. Immense resources, material and human, are wasted, which should be devoted to the improvement of the human condition and the conquest of knowledge of the material world.

The creation of a society in which the development of knowledge can be freed from the constraints of capitalism requires the application of science and reason to the evolution of society and to politics. In opposition to postmodernism and its many variants, which insist that there is no objective truth, Marxism is rooted in an analysis of the laws of socioeconomic development.

Driven inexorably by its internal contradictions, capitalism is leading mankind toward the abyss of world war and dictatorship. These same contradictions, however, also produce the basis for the overthrow of capitalism: the international working class. The objective process must be made conscious, and the growing opposition of millions of workers and youth around the world must be transformed into a political movement that has as its aim the establishment of an internationally coordinated, rationally directed system of economic planning based on equality and the satisfaction of human need: socialism.

J&K: Need for an Urgent Review

Ashok Bhan

Indian Army Chief Gen Bipin Rawat has rightly shown his serious concern regarding the developing situation in the Kashmir valley where interference of separatists’ supporters is jeopardising the implementation of collateral-damage-free counter-insurgency operations. These protests have led to losses of lives of security force (SF) personnel and even escape of terrorists - both of which were avoidable. On 12 and 14 February 2017, eight terrorists were killed in three encounters that were  based on specific information regarding the presence of the former in residential houses at Nagbal Frisal (Kulgam), Hajan (Bandipora) and Handwara; but these operations also led to the deaths of two civilians and six SF personnel, including a Major in the Indian Army, and injuries to over a dozen SF personnel (including a Commanding Officer of the CRPF). In these encounters, locals are learnt to have gathered in large numbers and alerted the hiding terrorists, and even pelted stones at the SFs, resulting in unusually large casualties on the SF side.

 

This is not the first time that SF personnel have lost lives fighting terrorists in such numbers. The difference is that in the past, generally, such high numbers of casualties occurred in explosions, suicide attacks, ambushes and hit-and-run incidents in crowded places - always initiated by the terrorists. This time, as well as in most other cases in the recent past, the losses of lives took place during information-based operations wherein the troops had had time to plan and go well prepared. The locals' large scale support for the terrorists during these operations is a cause for concern. The Army Chief has appropriately voiced his concern and has warned those attacking SFs during anti-militancy operations of tough action. There are reports of the state government issuing prohibitory orders in a three kilometre belt surrounding an operation site to keep the protestors away from the line of fire.

 

Security Related Trends

Between January 1990 and December 2016, 5630 SF personnel (including 983 Jammu and Kashmir Police personnel, 486 Special Police Officers and 131 Village Defence Committee members) lost their lives in the ongoing armed conflict. As per the J&K State CID statistics, over 27 years, one SF member has lost his/her life for nearly four terrorists killed (see table below). In the initial years (1990-98) the terrorists were present in large numbers and operations were carried out unhindered, resulting in proportionately fewer losses of SF personnel. During its Kargil misadventure and thereafter (1999-2003), Pakistan inducted hardened foreign mercenaries; and the state witnessed a spate of suicide attacks leading to higher casualties on the SF side, with one soldier's life lost for every three terrorists killed. Thereafter, in the decade spanning 2003-12, a steady ratio of 3.5:1 was witnessed. In the past four years (2013-16) one SF personnel's life was lost for every two terrorists killed.

 

This is indicative, in addition to other evidence, of the drift in the situation on ground, and must be noted with seriousness.

 

TABLE 1

Ratio between terrorists killed in encounters and lives lost by SF personnel (including J&K police) at different stages of armed conflict in Jammu and Kashmir

 

A.

Period [1990-1998 (nine years)]: Terrorists Killed (9734); SF Casualties (1825); Ratio of Terrorists to SF Casualties (5.3:1)

 

B.

Period [1999-2002 (four years)]: Terrorists Killed (6329); SF Casualties (2041); Ratio of Terrorists to SF Casualties (3.1:1)

 

C.

Period [1999-2002 (four years)]: Terrorists Killed (5432); SF Casualties (1543); Ratio of Terrorists to SF Casualties (3.5:1)

 

D.

Period [2013-2016 (four years)]: Terrorists Killed (435); SF Casualties (221); Ratio of Terrorists to SF Casualties (2.0:1)

 

E.

Period [1990-2016 (twenty-seven years)]: Terrorists Killed (21930); SF Casualties (5630); Ratio of Terrorists to SF Casualties (3.9:1)

 

The increase in casualties in the recent times can be partly attributed to fewer numbers of terrorists being spread over a large area, making counter-insurgency operations tedious and man power intensive. Additionally, fresh induction of locals in militant ranks, better training, increased infiltration, ceasefire violations by Pakistan, and increase in local support for terrorists have all contributed to this situation over the past four years. Despite India’s best efforts, Pakistan is not keen on resumption of dialogue and there exists a lull in the engagement with the separatist groups. Meanwhile, Pakistan is exploiting its support base in the Valley to the fullest extent. The 2016 agitation that followed the killing of militant commander Burhan Wani has increased local support for militants and separatists. There are reports of separatists’ plans to resume protests and agitations after winter ends.

 

Political Situation

There is a disconnect between the elected representatives and their constituents, particularly in the Kashmir valley, and alienation has increased. Mainstream politicians, instead of reaching out to the people, are busy indulging in army-bashing at every opportunity. This is demoralising for the SFs and encourages hostile elements to lay impediments to the former's operational duties. Barring the chief minister, all other Valley based leaders are maintaining a studied silence, expecting the SFs to magically bring peace. Meanwhile, the agitating separatists construe this silence as support.

 

It is a tight rope walk for the SFs in such a hostile environment. People-friendly measures to avoid collateral damage and operating with hands tied behind will mean more casualties and demoralisation for the troops and the police. Conversely, harsher measures will further alienate the people. While the SFs must carry out their mandated responsibility of flushing out terrorists, other players cannot ignore their role of reaching out to the people and other stake holders any further. The fact of the matter is that isolating Pakistan or avoiding separatists has not helped India’s cause in Kashmir. The wait-and-watch approach has not yielded any positive results.

 

The peace process in Jammu and Kashmir faces a serious challenge that cannot be met by security forces alone. The Army Chief has voiced his concern and has appropriately reflected on his mandated area of responsibility. The political leadership at the Centre and in the State will have to urgently review the situation and take appropriate initiatives to ease the law and order situation on the ground to prevent recurrence and escalation of the violence and protests of 2016.

Newcastle University Overseas Research Scholarship (ORS) 2017/2018 – UK

Application Deadline: 28th April 2017 

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): Newcastle University UK

About Scholarship: Newcastle University is committed to offering support to the very best international students hoping to pursue a programme of research. We are pleased to offer a small number of University funded NUORS awards for outstanding international students who apply to commence PhD studies in any subject in 2017/18.

Type: PhD Research

Selection Criteria and Eligibility: A candidate could be eligible to apply for a NUORS award if:

• they have been offered a place on a PhD research programme
• they have been assessed as international/overseas for fees purposes, and are wholly or partially self-financing
• they intend to register to start your studies during the 2017/18 academic year.

Applications for a NUORS award cannot be made for a course that has already been started by a student.

Number of Scholarships: 15

Value of Scholarship: Each award (value approximately £7,800 – £11,700 per annum) covers the difference between fees for UK/EU students and international students. 

Duration of Scholarship: for the period of the programme

How to Apply

• You must have already applied for and been offered a place to study at Newcastle University before you apply for a NUORS award.
• Please complete the NUORS application form electronically and in accordance with the NUORS regulations, which are provided at the end of the application form.  You will also be required to provide details of an academic referee; the University will then contact your referee directly.
• Applications must be submitted electronically via the email address provided below. Unfortunately paper copies cannot be accepted.
• If you experience problems with the application form, please contact Student Financial Support who can e-mail a copy of the form and the regulations to you.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for Details

Sponsors: Newcastle University, UK

Estonian Government International Scholarships for Short Courses 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 20th March 2017

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (University): 

• University of Tartu
• Tallinn University
• Tallinn University of Technology

About the Award: The scholarships are intended to support participation in summer courses of Estonian language and culture as well as in courses of summer and winter schools related to the English-language curricula of degree study in Estonia.

Type: Short courses

Eligibility: 

• The stipend is available for students of Bachelor’s, Master’s or doctoral studies in foreign universities who are actively involved in the studies at the time of application and have been studying at university for at least one year.
• During the period of payment of grant the scholarship recipient should stay in Estonia.
• The candidate should pre-register to the course for applying for the scholarship.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: The scholarship is used to reimburse up to 500 EUR of the course fee and accommodation costs of 25 EUR per day for a maximum of 28 days per secondment in a calendar year.

Duration of Scholarship: 4 weeks

How to Apply: 

• application form and motivation letter through online application system
• confirmation of admission from the higher education institution in Estonia or confirmation of submission of required admission documents;
• copy of passport or ID-card.
• transcript of records from the home university;
• confirmation of registration from home university containing information on the applicant’s level of study, normal period of studies and progress towards the degree;
• confirmation of admission from organising institution (can be sent by e-mail);

All documents should be in English or Estonian. Documents must be translated to any of these languages if the language of issuance is different. The foundation has the right to require the additional documents. Submitted documents will be not returned to the applicant. The applications which are not full complicated, drawn up as required, include false information or arrive with delay are not assessed.

The application system link: https://taotlused.archimedes.ee/EN/pub_login.php. Please register in order to start the application.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Estonian Government

HEC Paris/Eiffel MBA Scholarships for Developing Countries 2017/2018 – France

Application Deadline: Within 1 week of admission. No essay required

For those admitted and confirmed after 27th December 2016, decisions will be made in March 2018

Eligible Countries: EIFFEL is offered for candidates working in emerging countries

To be taken at (country): HEC – Paris

About Scholarship: Launched in January 1999 by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Ministère des Affaires Etrangères), the Eiffel Scholarship is designed to bolster international recruiting by French schools of higher education, at a time when competition to attract top foreign students is growing among developed countries. HEC reserves the right to submit only those candidates it feels best qualify for the Eiffel Scholarship as the award is particularly competitive and prestigious. Note that applications from students currently studying outside France will be given priority over those from students already studying in France.

Type: MBA

Selection Criteria and Eligibility: The HEC MBA Program applies on behalf of admitted eligible students. In order to be eligible the candidate must:

• Be aged 30 years old or less in the selection year.
• Only admitted candidates can apply for this scholarship.
• Have a single nationality from a developing country deemed an ’emerging country’ by the French state department, especially those in Asia and Latin America, for example, currently under-represented among the student population in France.

Number of Scholarships: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: The Eiffel Scholarship provides participants with a monthly allowance of approximately €1,100, and covers additional expenses including travel, health insurance and cultural activities. Tuition fees are not covered by the scholarship.

Duration of Scholarship: for the period of study

Offered annually? Yes

How to Apply: Interested candidates should first apply for admission into the HEC Paris MBA programme in order to get this scholarship.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for Details

Sponsors: French Ministry of Foreign Affairs

BMCE Bank of Africa – African Entrepreneurship Award – USD$1 Million for Women (and Men) Entrepreneurs 2017

Application Deadline: You can submit your business idea from 17th February, 2017 through 28th April, 2017.

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: African citizens

Area of Interest: Your business must be relevant to one of these categories:

• Education – positively impact education in Africa
• Environment – positively impact the environment in Africa
• Uncharted– a high-impact business venturing into unexplored territory or untested markets

About Award: Are you dreaming of launching or growing your business idea in your community? Join the thousands of women (and men) entrepreneurs creating jobs all over Africa and submit your idea for a chance to share in the $1 million award.

At the African Entrepreneurship Award, know your business idea is safe, your time is respected, and your mentorship is our key priority. In 2015, just 25% of our business proposals came from women. For 2016, we want to change that.

Offered Since: not specified

Type: Entrepreneurship award

Eligibility: You, the entrepreneur, must meet the following criteria as you submit your business proposal:

• You must be a citizen of an African country
• You must be a minimum of 18 years old as of October 1, 2016
• Your business must be applicable in an African country
• Your business proposal must include a technological component (digital, machinery, computers, ICT, automated processes, field related technologies, etc.)
• Your business must be for profit.

Additional Information

• You can submit a proposal as a resident of any country worldwide – keeping in mind that you must be a citizen of an African country
  • For example, a resident of the United Arab Emirates with Egyptian citizenship is eligible for this Award
• Your business can operate in any African country even if you are not a citizen of that country
  • For example, you can submit a proposal for a different country in Africa than your personal, African citizenship (e.g. a Ghanaian citizen can submit a proposal for a business in Liberia)
• You can submit a proposal for a business already in operation
• Your business can operate across borders in multiple African countries
• Your business should demonstrate the potential to scale beyond one region in Africa to pan-African impact
• You can operate in multiple countries, but you will be asked to designate a primary community in Africa that will benefit or be impacted by your business.

Number of Awards: several

How to Apply: Submit your business idea beginning February 17, 2017 through April 28, 2017. Soon after you submit a completed proposal, a mentor will be in touch with you, guiding you to bettering your idea. And yes, if you have a better idea, you can resubmit it at least once before April 28, 2017.

You can submit a business proposal in one or two of the three Award categories: Education, Environment, or Uncharted

Visit Awards Webpage for details

Award Provider: BMCE Bank of Africa