Obama’s Ukrainian Coup Caused 2.5 Million Ukrainian Refugees Into Russia

Eric Zuesse

On March 7th, Russia’s top parliamentarian dealing with the Ukrainian refugee influx into Russia — dealing, that is, with the people who have fled Ukraine as a result of U.S. President Barack Obama’s 2014 coup overthrowing Ukraine’s democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych — presented the first-ever comprehensive number of asylum-applicants from Ukraine who have received asylum there after that February 2014 coup. The Russian government had never before publicly provided a number, but does have an established system of processing refugees, including assignment of official refugee status, which “allows the recipient various social benefits, including unemployment compensation” and so each Ukrainian refugee has a file with the government.

As reported by Tass: 

Russia has received more than 2,500,000 refugees since the outbreak of the conflict in eastern Ukriane, Yuri Vorobyov, Deputy Speaker of Russia’s Federation Council (upper house of parliament) and Chairman of the Committee for Public Support to Residents of Southeastern Ukraine, said on Tuesday.

“Europe has received 900,000 [refugees] and shuddered, while we have received over 2,500,000 refugees on our territory and continue to provide assistance,” he said opening the round table discussion “Russia-Donbass: New Cooperation Mechanisms.”

That coup, which generated these millions of refugees, had been planned by the U.S. White House since 2011, and culminated on 20 February 2014. Also on that day, hundreds of Crimeans who had been standing in Kiev with signs opposing the overthrow of the President for whom 75% of Crimeans had voted, were attacked by supporters of the coup (which was fronted by, and was propagandized as being, the “Maidan revolution” demanding ‘democracy’ in Ukraine, though the coup actually ended democracy there). These Crimeans immediately scrambled back into the eight buses that had taken them to Kiev and headed homeward, but the U.S.-government-backed Right Sector paramilitaries went in hot pursuit of the buses, and burnt some of them and massacred many of the demonstrators, outside of Kiev, in the town of Korsun. This became called “the Korsun Massacre”, and Crimeans in Crimea immediately started demonstrating in Crimea, for Crimea to become, once again, as it had been until 1954, part of Russia. Crimeans overwhelmingly favored Russia over the United States, and were terrified by the racist anti-Russian government that now ruled in Kiev. This fear wasn’t only because of the massacre, nor only because 75% of Crimeans had voted for the man whom Obama had overthrown, but also because Crimeans generally (and most Ukrainians who had voted for Yanukovych) knew well the intense racist hatred against pro-Russian Ukrainians by the Right Sector people, who had actually carried out the coup. A plebiscite was held in Crimea on 16 March 2014, and the vote to rejoin Russia was over 90%. U.S. President Obama then imposed economic sanctions against Russia for accepting Crimea back into Russia. These sanctions, and U.S. military aid to the new junta-government in Kiev, publicly renewed The West’s Cold War against Russia (which had actually continued secretly against Russia ever since the end of the Soviet Union in 1991; the Cold War had ended only on the Russian side).

U.S. President Obama recognized, of course, that the residents in the far-eastern region of Ukraine, Donbass, where the vote had been 90% for Yanukovych, could make impossible, in any subsequent nationwide Ukrainian Presidential election, a continuation of the U.S.-imposed Ukrainian government’s rule over Ukraine; and, so, his Ukrainian government instituted an ethnic-cleansing campaign in Donbass to kill as many of them as possible and force as many as possible of those Donbass residents to flee into Russia. Getting rid of those voters was essential to the success of Obama’s Ukrainian operation. That ethnic cleansing is the reason why 2.5 million former Ukrainians are now living in Russia: their presence in the Ukrainian electorate would jeopardize continued U.S. control over the Ukrainian government and was thus impermissible. These 2.5 million have thus been entirely removed from Ukraine now, and perhaps enough of those voters are gone from Ukraine so that once again Donbass will be able to become part of Ukraine, even while the U.S. continues to control Ukraine.

In the U.S. and the other nations that are controlled by the U.S. aristocracy, newsmedia typically criticize Russia regarding the Ukrainian refugees, such as by saying that “the Russian government’s policies puts them in an even more disadvantaged position” than Russia’s native population endure, so that these refugees suffer not because of the U.S. government, but because of the Russian government.

America’s new President, Donald Trump, has made clear that the economic sanctions against Russia will not end until both Crimea and Donbass become again parts of Ukraine. So, he supports his predecessor’s Russia-policy. America’s wars to strangle Russia (such as by eliminating leaders friendly toward Russia, including Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, and Viktor Yanukovych — and attempting to do it also to Bashar al-Assad) will, in other words, continue.

Ecuador faces run-off vote with rightist challenging Correa’s chosen successor

Cesar Uco & Armando Cruz 

Ecuadorian voters are set to go the polls again on April 2 for a second round presidential election after the first round vote on February 19 failed to produce a clear-cut victor.

The candidate of incumbent President Rafael Correa’s party Alianza PAIS, Lenin Moreno, came close, but ultimately failed to reach the result required under Ecuador’s electoral law of 40 percent of the vote plus a 10 percent margin over the second-place candidate.

Moreno, Correa’s vice-president from 2007 to 2013, ended up with 39.36 percent of the ballots, while his rival, Guillermo Lasso, a banker and representative of Ecuador’s political right, received 28.09 percent of the votes.

The third place went to Cynthia Viteri of the Partido Social Cristiano (Social Christian Party) with 16.32 percent. None of the other five candidates reached 10 percent of the votes. Among them was Abdala Bucaram (4.82 percent), who ruled as president between August 1996 and February 1997 before being removed by the congress on the grounds of “mental incompetency” amid massive strikes and protests.

Moreno, who formerly worked in the public tourism sector, was left paralyzed by a shooting in 1998 and has since been in a wheelchair. He has chaired and promoted organizations assisting the disabled.

Lasso is a multimillionaire businessman and main shareholder of the Guayaquil Bank. His political career has always been tied to the Ecuadorian right, while promoting closer commercial and political relations with the US. He founded the political organization CREO, which defines itself as a center-right movement comprised of former members of the UNO, Izquierda Democrática, Movimiento Concertacion and members of the national private sector. In 2013, Lasso lost the presidential elections to Correa, obtaining 22.68 percent of the votes.

Polls of likely voters in the second round are divided, with some favoring Lasso and others Moreno. The country is sharply polarized with the political right seeking to capitalize on the shrinking economy, widespread reports of corruption and the attacks carried out by the Correa government on workers and democratic rights.

The struggle of Correa’s Alianza PAIS party to hold onto political power is unfolding in the context of the series of defeats suffered by governments of Latin America’s so-called “left turn” or “pink tide” which saw the coming to power of bourgeois parties that sought to utilize the continent’s “commodities boom” to effect populist politics and minimal assistance programs for the poor. Amid the deepening crisis of US capitalism, these governments also reoriented trade and commercial ties toward US rivals, particularly China. They also benefited from the support of various Stalinist, Pabloite and other pseudo-left tendencies that sought to suppress independent workers’ struggles.

The slowing of the Chinese economy and the resulting fall in commodity prices has spelled economic crisis and political instability for all of these regimes. Ecuador, with oil accounting for 40 percent of its export earnings, was among the hardest hit. The World Bank projects a 2.9 percent fall in the country’s economy this year, which would give it the worst economic performance of any country in the region after the even more oil-dependent Venezuela.

With one after another of these “left” bourgeois governments responding to the capitalist crisis by implementing attacks on the working class, there has been a corresponding collapse in popular support and a movement by the right to fill the political vacuum.

If Lasso succeeds in the run-off, Ecuador will follow the path already taken by Argentina, with the election of Mauricio Macri –another wealthy businessman-- after the Peronist years of Nestor and Cristina Kirchner and the coming to power of Michel Temer and his counter reform agenda in Brazil after the impeachment and downfall of Dilma Rousseff and her Workers Party government. Evo Morales’ failure in the reelection referendum in Bolivia and the collapse of support for the Chavista government of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela are also part of this process.

Another important factor affecting the region’s governments and the Ecuadorian election is the international bribery and corruption scandal centered around the Brazilian construction multinational Odebrecht, whose executives have confessed to having secured contracts with governments of 12 countries in Latin America by bribing high public officers with millions of dollars and then recovering its payoffs through cost over-runs on its projects.

An estimated $34 million were paid out to Ecuadorian officials during Correa’s time in office, according to US Justice Department documents. The courts in Ecuador have done next to nothing in terms of investigations and prosecutions over the scandal.

As in other Latin American countries, this corruption directly involves the president’s family members. According to GAN Integrity, “Among the biggest corruption cases in the sector is the award of government contracts worth US$167 million to the brother of Ecuador’s President Correa, Fabricio Correa, during the first two years of the president’s tenure.

Correa, who has disassociated himself from his brother, recently declared that, if Lasso wins he will stay in Ecuador in order to fight what he said would be inevitable corruption charges.

In the beginning, Correa and his Alianza PAIS movement (in office since 2007) sought to use the surpluses provided by high oil prices and loans from China to adopt a posture of independence toward Washington and to finance public projects, especially in health and education. His government also reduced extreme poverty and raised the minimum wage.

With the collapse of oil prices, Correa cut government programs, laid off thousands of employees at state-run companies and attacked pension and labor rights.

The economic crisis reached such a point in the spring of 2014 that Ecuador agreed to transfer more than half of its gold – approximately 466,000 ounces of gold worth US$ 580 million – to Goldman Sachs for three years, a move designed to bring confidence to the markets so that Ecuadorian government could confront its growing debt crisis.

In June 2012, Correa defied the US by giving Julian Assange, the leader of WikiLeaks, asylum in its London embassy. However, Correa’s posture as a left populist, willing to defy Washington, has evaporated in sync with the fall in oil prices. By November 2016, the Correa government ordered the severing of Assange’s Internet connection under pressure from the US government.

Lasso has publicly promised to expel Assange from the London embassy once he is elected as a means of currying favor with Washington. “The Ecuadorian people have been paying a cost that we should not have to bear,” Lasso told the British newspaper the Guardian, during an interview in Quito.

Lasso has also vowed to take Ecuador out of the ALBA (Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America) alliance, which was formed by Venezuela and Cuba as an alternative to Washington’s drive for a free trade agreement of the Americas. And, rather than rely on China, which had been the predominant creditor of Correa’s government, but whose loans have been steadily shrinking, he is expected to reorient the country’s economy to the US and the IMF.

Whoever succeeds Correa, whether it is his own man Moreno or the right-wing, pro-US banker Lasso, the next government can be expected to turn further to the right in order to defend the interests of Ecuador’s capitalist ruling class, acceding to the pressure from Washington as it attempts to counter Chinese penetration of what US imperialism has long regarded as “its own backyard.”

Much of what passes for Ecuador’s “left” is positioning itself to assist in this turn. Paco Moncayo, a retired military general of the Democratic Left (ID) party, who placed fourth in the first round of the Ecuadorian election, has openly called for a vote for Lasso in the second round.

“Lasso represents neo-liberalism, which has done so much damage, but today he is the lesser evil and necessary to recover democracy,” Moncayo said.

Similar positions have been taken by “left” parties and movements that supported Moncayo as part of his National Accord for Change (ANC) electoral alliance. These include the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador, a Maoist party, as well as the Pachakutik indigenous party, both of which originally backed Correa’s rise to power.

European powers extend offensive against Russia into Balkans

Paul Mitchell 

The European Council summit meeting of the European Union (EU) heads of government last week accused Russia of destabilising the Balkan region.

The declaration will sharply increase the worsening tensions between Russia and the Western powers over Ukraine and Syria that has seen the militarisation of large stretches of Russia’s European frontiers and a flood of NATO troops in eastern Europe. In addition, the deepening economic and political crisis of world capitalism is exacerbating divisions between the European powers and the United States, especially since the election of Donald Trump to the presidency—presaging an escalating drift towards protectionism, militarism and war.

Under these conditions, the contemporary situation in the Balkans, like that in eastern Europe, the Middle East and South China Sea, increasingly echoes the period before the First World War over 100 years ago.

At the summit, Donald Tusk, the newly re-elected president of the European Council, said the Balkans were “vital for Europe”.

“Tensions and divisions have got out of hand, partly because of unhealthy external influences, which have been destabilising several countries for some time,” he said. “I will propose to leaders that we take action.”

Tusk’s accusations of unhealthy external influences were directed at Moscow, but it is the Western powers that are responsible for the region’s destabilisation and the resulting social and economic disaster, increasing ethnic tensions and growth of militarism.

The major imperialist powers, particularly the US and Germany, deliberately engineered Yugoslavia’s break-up in the 1990s, in order to isolate and target Serbia as the regional power considered to be the main obstacle to the assertion of the West’s control over an area of geo-strategic interest. They were indifferent to the tragic consequences of their piecemeal break-up of the Yugoslav federation, which history has proven would inevitably lead to civil war and create new ethnically based states incapable of providing a progressive solution to the problems facing the Balkan people.

The Bosnian war of 1992-1995 and the 1998-1999 Kosovo conflict both saw NATO military intervention, culminating in the deployment of 60,000 soldiers under Operation Joint Endeavour and the bombing of Serbia’s capital, Belgrade.

The EU first offered the promise of eventual EU membership in 2003. Croatia joined in 2013, but Montenegro and Serbia have only started formal talks and Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and Macedonia are yet to begin. Then in 2014, European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker declared that the EU would not accept new countries during his five-year term of office. Moreover, the concept of a union in Europe has been thrown into crisis over the impoverishment of Greece, Britain’s vote last year to exit the EU, and then the new Trump administration’s attacks both on the EU and on Germany in particular, as a trade competitor.

But even as Berlin and Paris are proposing a two-tier/two-speed model involving a select group of countries becoming more integrated while other countries are relegated to a more peripheral relationship, the EU felt it politic to strongly suggest at the summit that the Balkan countries are tantalisingly close to membership. Indeed, in the week prior to the summit, the EU’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, made a whistle-stop tour of the region, declaring, “I’m working to see every single one of the Western Balkans partners move forward on the reform path, towards the European Union, to ensure the process is irreversible. Regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations remain essential in this context”.

In reality, in every country she visited, Mogherini was confronted with the fact that regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations remain further away than ever.

Serbia and Croatia are involved in what is regularly described as a “mini arms race,” verging on the “brink of war.” Both countries are renewing their military hardware and considering the re-introduction of conscription.

Mogherini found her speech to the Serbian parliament on March 3 drowned out by chants of ”Serbia, Russia, we don’t need the [European] Union!” by right-wing Serbian Radical Party nationalists who feel emboldened by the overtures of Trump to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Of all the relationships Russia has with the Balkan countries, Serbia has been the closest. In 2013, a joint declaration on a strategic partnership was signed followed by a military cooperation agreement leading to the first-ever combined Serbian-Russian military exercise. For this reason, Serbia has refused to support Western sanctions against Russia, but there is increasing pressure to do so as a condition of EU membership. Its ability to balance between the EU and Russia is rapidly narrowing.

Serbia’s relations with Kosovo have deteriorated further. In January, the first train to be sent from Serbia to the Serb-populated enclave in northern Kosovo was daubed with “Kosovo is Serbia” slogans in 21 languages. Kosovo President Hashim Thaci has accused Serbia of attempting to use ”the Crimea model” to annex the enclave. Last week, he introduced legislation into parliament to transform the country’s lightly armed Kosovo Security Force into a national army without a change to the constitution that would require the consent of the 11 Serbian MPs in the 120-member chamber.

At the same time the Kosovan parliament called for the suspension of the “normalisation” dialogue with Serbia, until France rejects a Serbian extradition request for former Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) commander Ramush Haradinaj and releases him. The KLA functioned as a US proxy force prior to and during the Kosovo war.

International recognition of Kosovo’s independence remains stalled. It has been recognised by 114 countries, but not by Serbia, Russia, China, Israel, Iran, Spain, Greece and others.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), the European Commission’s latest progress report on the country’s EU membership prospects says the country’s institutions are virtually non-functioning. It is more than 20 years since the civil war there was ended by the 1995 US-brokered Dayton agreement, but the country remains divided into two semi-independent ethically based entities—each with its own president, government, parliament and police overseen by an unelected United Nations-appointed High Representative with semi-dictatorial powers.

In Montenegro, Mogherini’s speech to the parliament was boycotted by pro-Russian opposition parties opposed to the country joining NATO, probably in May. The Putin government has warned that NATO enlargement in the Balkans is one of the greatest threats to Russia’s interests. Tensions have soared over an alleged assassination plot following last October’s elections against former President Milo Djukanovic, who has steered Montenegro towards NATO. The police arrested 20 people including two “nationalists from Russia,” accusing them of the attempted assassination. The Montenegrin special prosecutor insisted there was no evidence that the Russian government was involved.

However, by February 19, the UK’s Sunday Telegraph published a front-page article quoting British government sources saying “the planned coup was one of the most blatant recent examples of an increasingly aggressive campaign of interference in Western affairs.”

Prime Minister Theresa May then stepped in pledging to curb Russia’s “destabilisation” of the region and increasing the UK’s involvement, including hosting the 2018 Western Balkans Summit.

As Mogherini was visiting Macedonia, she was confronted by thousands of people taking part in daily protests against the formation of a new coalition government including three ethnic Albanian parties that are calling for Albanian to be designated as a second official language.

The scale of the tragedy in the Balkans has led to calls for its further restructuring along ethnic lines. Former UK diplomat Timothy Less, in his Foreign Affairs article, “Dysfunction in the Balkans: Can the Post-Yugoslav Settlement Survive?,” suggested the need for a new “map” of the region based on a Greater Croatia, Greater Serbia, and Greater Albania. Such calls can only lead to further tragedies.

US sends drones, assassination squad to South Korea

Peter Symonds

The Trump administration has further exacerbated the extremely tense standoff on the Korean Peninsula by dispatching attack drones to South Korea and sending special forces units to participate in massive war games already underway. The military build-up takes place as the White House considers launching strikes on North Korean nuclear and military sites.

US Forces Korea announced on Monday that the company of Gray Eagle Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) will be permanently stationed at Kunsan Air Base, south of Seoul. “The UAS adds significant intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability to U.S. Forces Korea and our [South Korean] partners,” it stated.

While the US announcement emphasized reconnaissance, the Grey Eagle drones can also carry up to four Hellfire missiles that have been used to carry out assassinations and strike military targets. The lethal drones can stay aloft for up to 24 hours.

The South Korean military was in no doubt as to the purpose of the deployment. An unnamed official told the Yonhap news agency: “In case of a war on the Korean Peninsula, the unmanned aircraft could infiltrate into the skies of North Korea and make a precision strike on the war command and other major military facilities.”

The dispatch of attack drones to South Korea coincides with the involvement of US special forces in annual Foal Eagle war games, including SEAL Team 6, the highly-trained assassination squad that killed Osama bin Laden. The SEAL team will take part in the joint exercises in South Korea along with US Army Rangers, Delta Force and Green Berets, according to Yonhap.

A military official told the news agency that bigger numbers and more diverse US special operations forces were taking part, in order “to practice missions to infiltrate into the North, remove the North’s war command and demolition of its key military facilities.” The joint Foal Eagle drills are the biggest ever, involving more than 320,000 troops backed by a US aircraft carrier strike group, stealth fighters and strategic bombers.

Commenting on US secretary of state Rex Tillerson’s trip to Japan, South Korea and China later this week, State Department spokesman Mark Toner absurdly claimed that the US military was taking “defensive measures” against “an increasingly worrying, concerning threat from North Korea.”

Neither the drones nor the Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) anti-ballistic missile system to which Toner was referring are “defensive” in character. The drones, along with the special forces units, are rehearsing for “pre-emptive” attacks on North Korean military sites and “decapitation raids” to kill North Korean leaders. This is in line with an aggressive new joint operational plan, OPLAN 5015, agreed to between the US and South Korea in late 2015.

The THAAD deployment is part of the Pentagon’s broader build-up of anti-ballistic missile systems and military forces in Asia, primarily for war against China. Beijing has repeatedly voiced strenuous objections to the THAAD installation in South Korea, which has a powerful radar system capable of peering deep into the Chinese mainland and giving the US military much greater advance warning of Chinese missile launches in the event of war.

The Trump administration, which is currently reviewing US strategy towards North Korea, is exploiting its test launch of four ballistic missiles last week to advance longstanding military preparations on the Korean Peninsula. According to the Wall Street Journal, the White House is actively considering “regime change” in Pyongyang and military strikes on North Korea.

“We have to look at new ideas, new ways of dealing with North Korea,” US State Department spokesman Toner blandly declared. “China understands that threat. They’re not oblivious to what’s happening in North Korea.”

The reference to China underscores the aims of Tillerson’s upcoming trip. Firstly, he intends to brief Washington’s Japanese and South Korean allies on US plans and to encourage closer military cooperation in the event of conflict. Then he will fly to Beijing, where he will attempt to bully the Chinese government into taking tougher punitive action against Pyongyang.

The mounting US threats towards North Korea are also directed against China, which the Trump administration is targeting as the chief obstacle to maintaining US dominance in Asia and internationally. Tillerson has provocatively declared that the US should block Chinese access to islets under Beijing’s administration in the South China Sea. The only way to carry out such a reckless plan would be through a US military blockade—an act of war that could provoke conflict between the two nuclear-armed powers.

Tensions in the South China Sea have been further strained by the decision of the Japanese military to dispatch its largest warship, the JS Izumo, for three months of operations including in disputed waters. According to Reuters, the Izumo will make stops in Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines and Sri Lanka, before joining the Malabar joint naval exercise with Indian and US naval vessels in the Indian Ocean in July. It will also train with the US navy in the South China Sea.

Over the eight years of the Obama administration and its “pivot to Asia,” the US has engaged in a systematic military expansion throughout the Asia Pacific, strengthened alliances and strategic partnerships and greatly aggravated dangerous regional flashpoints, including the Korean peninsula and the South China Sea. The Trump administration, which has been critical of the “pivot” for not being aggressive enough, is now embarking on a course that greatly heightens the danger of war.

The response of the North Korean regime to Washington’s actions is reactionary through and through. Its nuclear and missile tests, along with its bloodcurdling threats and Korean chauvinism, in no way defend the Korean people, but do provide the US with a pretext for its military build-up in North East Asia. According to the 38north.org web site, affiliated with John Hopkins University, commercial satellite imagery indicates that Pyongyang could be preparing for another nuclear test.

Confronted with an intense political crisis in Washington, the Trump administration is not simply considering, but actively preparing for, reckless provocations and military moves against North Korea that have the potential to trigger a cataclysmic war that draws in the entire world.

West Africa Civil Society Institute (WACSI) Research Fellowship for Young Civil Service Leaders in Africa 2017

Application Deadline: 3rd April 2017

Eligible Countries: West African countries

About the Award: This short-term fellowship (90 days) is an action-oriented initiative targeted at young researchers. The goal of the fellowship is to offer young researchers an opportunity to document indigenous practices on civic leadership and governance in West Africa. This will be done by providing a space for interaction between relevant stakeholders, including decision-makers, development practitioners, Civil society leaders and their constituents.

Specific objectives are to create opportunities for young researchers particularly those enrolled in PhD programmes to:
•Advance leadership and governance in the civil society sector;
•Access extensive knowledge resources and
•Establish links with the network of WACSI partners to exchange ideas and meet with experienced civil society practitioners, academics, and other stakeholders in West Africa.

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: Three young research fellows between the age brackets of 20-35 would be selected and be supported to conduct research on a specific area of civil society leadership and governance while taking into cognizance practitioner experiences.

Number of Awardees: 3

Value of Fellowship: The fellowship programme is made possible by the generous support of the Ford Foundation and Rockdale Foundation

Duration of Fellowship: 90 days

How to Apply: Applicants must submit:
•Curriculum vitae;
•Letter of motivation;
•Writing sample (a related paper, if available) and
•2 references (at least 1 academic).

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Ford Foundation and Rockdale Foundation

Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU) Wighton Fellowship in Engineering for Developing Countries 2017

Application Deadline: Friday 12th May 2017 at 23:59 BST.

Eligible Countries: Low or middle-income country

About the Award: Tenable either at any ACU member university outside the applicant’s home country, or in industry, commerce or public service in a Commonwealth country other than the applicant’s home country. Those working in universities may hold a fellowship in either another ACU member university or in industry, commerce or public service abroad; but those working in industry, commerce or public service can only hold a fellowship at an ACU member university.

Fellowships are not intended for degree courses, or for immediately postdoctoral programmes. The ACU cannot arrange fellows’ attachments, travel or accommodation, nor can it work out itineraries for them. Applicants should be aware that Titular Fellowships allow for small scale conference or course attendance within a wider programme, but applications where the primary or sole purpose is attendance of a conference or course will not be considered.

Field of Study: Engineering

Type: Fellowship

Eligibility: Applicants must be professional or academic staff working in the engineering department of an ACU member university in a low or middle-income country.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: Up to GBP 5000 and intended to cover:

• international economy return airfare and other travel costs
• medical insurance and visa fees
• board and lodging fees
• research costs

Duration of Fellowship: The tenure of the fellowship must be for a period of less than six months, and travel must be completed by 1 August 2018..

How to Apply: Apply here. Applicants must submit a proposal for the fellowship and provide proof of support from the host institution and the Executive Head of their home institution.

Fellows are required to submit a 1000-2,500 word report within three months of the fellowship ending.

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU)

IPC Dr. Peter Manniche Foundation Scholarships for Students from Developing Countries 2017 – Denmark

Application Deadline: 1st April 2017

Eligible Countries: Developing Countries

To be taken at (country): International People’s College, Denmark

About the Award: For almost 100 years, the International People’s College in Elsinore, Denmark, has worked to promote intercultural understanding, prioritizing the human being above all political or religious affiliation, that which is common to us all before that which divides us. All of this was made possible due to the vision of one man, Dr. Peter Manniche, the founder of the International People’s College. A man, who wholeheartedly believed that a school molded in the Danish Grundtvigian Folk High School tradition, could be the foundation of a long lasting peace between all peoples of the world, transcending self-interest to work together to secure a common future. Since its founding in 1921, the International People’s College has worked as a liberal peace academy, gathering young people from every part of the world to learn from each other, engage with one another and form enduring bonds of friendship, respect and mutual understanding.

As part of the legacy of Dr. Peter Manniche, a foundation was formed – the Dr. Peter Manniche Foundation – that should secure the school’s vision even after the passing of Manniche himself. The foundation aims to make it possible for students from anywhere in the world to become a student at the International People’s College, including students who would not financially be able to afford so.

Type: Undergraduate/Masters

Eligibility: Scholarships are primarily granted to young women and men from developing countries, who have demonstrated active participation in their local communities, an interest in intercultural subjects, and who vigorously believe in and will pursue the ideals and core values as those of the IPC. The final allocations of scholarships are dependent on the motivation of the individual to become an active student at the school expressed through an essay as part of the application.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Scholarship: The Dr. Peter Manniche Foundation Scholarships cover full tuition fee, room and board at the school. Additionally we offer up to 400 US$ to applicants who can demonstrate special financial needs, to cover expenses towards transportation. If you are offered the additional up to 400 US$ grant, it will be offered only as a reimbursement against proof of purchase, i.e. receipt for purchase of flight ticket, upon arrival at IPC.

The Dr. Peter Manniche Foundation Scholarship does not cover personal allowances, visa and insurance fees.

Duration of Scholarship: 

• Autumn Term 2017, incl. the intensive English course (July 23 – December 13, 2017)
• Autumn Term 2017, without the intensive English course (August 10 – December 13, 2017)
• Spring Term 2018 (January 11 – June 27, 2018)

The scholarships cover ONE of the aforementioned full terms.

How to Apply: We encourage deserving applicants to write a short application essay explaining why YOU should receive a scholarship.

You apply for the Dr. Peter Manniche Foundation Scholarship, directly at our website www.ipc.dk, and note in the application form that the scholarship you apply for is the “Dr. Peter Manniche Foundation Scholarship”.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: International People’s College

University of Bath Masters Scholarships for International Students 2017/2018 – UK

Application Deadline: Thursday 1st June 2017 (12:00 noon GMT+1).

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: International

To be taken at (country): UK

Eligible Fields of Study: Engineering, Humanities, Social Sciences and Science-related fields

About the Award: These Scholarships apply to new international fee-paying full-time Taught Postgraduate Masters students taking up a place of study in 2017-2018 who are identified by the University as eligible for consideration for one of the International Taught Postgraduate Masters Scholarships. They specifically apply to a group of 7 scholarship schemes which are centrally managed by the International Relations Office with funding sourced from the University, Faculties (Faculty of Engineering and Design, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences and Faculty of Science) and Alumni and Corporate Donors as outlined below.

However international students can apply for four of these scholarships:

Scheme 1: University of Bath International Scholarships Scheme (UoBISS)

Faculty of Engineering and Design, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Science | International | Taught Postgraduate Masters (MA, MSc MRes)

There are 75 scholarships worth up to £3,000 each in the University of Bath International Scholarships Scheme (UoBISS). These are for international fee-paying full-time taught post-graduate masters applicants from any country. This scheme includes stand-alone Masters of Research (MRes) programmes.

Scheme 2: Faculty of Engineering and Design Elite MSc Scholarships

Faculty of Engineering and Design | International | Taught Postgraduate Masters (MSc)

There are 20 Faculty of Engineering and Design Elite MSc Scholarships each worth £2,000 for international fee-paying full-time taught masters applicants from any country for MSc programmes in Engineering.

Scheme 3: Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Graduate School Scholarships

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences | International | Taught Postgraduate Masters (MA MSc MRes)

There are 20 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences scholarships each worth £2,000 for international fee paying full-time taught masters applicants from any country for masters programmes in Humanities and Social Sciences. This scheme includes stand-alone Masters of Research (MRes) programmes.

Scheme 4: Faculty of Science: Graduate School Taught Scholarships

Faculty of Science | International | Taught Postgraduate Masters (MSc MRes)

There are 20 Faculty of Science scholarships each worth £3000 for full-time international fee-paying taught masters applicants from any country for masters programmes in the Faculty of Science. This scheme includes stand-alone Masters of Research (MRes) programmes.

Type: Masters taught

Eligibility: 

• All candidates must be eligible to pay the international fee.  In the case that an awardee is re-classified as non-international fee payer s/he is no longer eligible for these awards and the University reserves the right to re-consider the award.
• Note that for all schemes Postgraduate PhD, Certificate, Diploma and CPD programmes are not eligible. PhD programmes with an MRes are also excluded (e.g. Integrated PhD, MRes/PhD). All part time and distance learning programmes are also excluded.
• All candidates need to have formally accepted an offer of a place (conditional or unconditional) on a Taught Postgraduate Masters Programme 2017-2018 at the time of making an application for a scholarship. ‘Formally accepted’ means that the decision is logged on the University (SAMIS) application system.
• If a scholarship is awarded to a conditional offer holder, then any scholarship will also be conditional on the student achieving the conditions of entry.
• Candidates must submit the completed online scholarships application form by 12:00 noon (GMT+1) on Thursday 1 st June 2017. In the case of multiple applications from the same candidate, only the earliest application by date will be considered.

Selection Criteria: Scholarship awardees are chosen primarily for their academic and extra-curricular excellence and their potential contribution to the international community at Bath.

Duration of Scholarship: Fulltime

How to Apply: 

• Ensure you have firmly accepted your (conditional or unconditional) offer of study for a full-time taught post-graduate masters programme.
• Read the guidelines carefully.
• You can apply for your scholarship through the Bath Application Tracker.
• Applications must be received by Thursday 1 June 2017 (12:00 noon GMT+1).
• Decisions will be made by Wednesday 5 July 2017 (18:00 GMT+1).

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Award Provider: University of Bath

Kochi University of Technology (KUT) Scholarships for International Doctoral Students 2017/2018 – Japan

Application deadlines:

• 17th  March, 2017
  
• 15th September 2017

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Scholarship is open for international students

To be Taken at: Japan

Program of Study: Doctoral Program (3 years), Department of Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering

About Scholarship

The Special Scholarship Program (SSP) was established in 2003 in order to support the advanced research of the university by enlisting the help of highly capable students especially students from foreign countries. Every year in April and October, the university enrolls selected doctoral students for specific research projects. The students pursue the doctoral course in English (excl. Japanese students) while at the same time assisting their host professor as a research assistant (RA). Through this program KUT wishes to expand and deepen international ties with academic and educational institutions all over the world.

Offered Since: 2003

Type: Full International Doctoral scholarship

Eligibility Criteria                             

Applicants are required to meet all of the following

(1)To have or to be scheduled to acquire a master’s degree before the KUT enrollment date
(2) To be 35 years old or under at the time of enrollment
(3) To have an excellent academic record and strong bachelor’s and master’s degrees from reputable universities
(4) To have the intention, adequate knowledge and research skill to work in one of the designated research projects
(5) To have high English proficiency

Obligation

• The SSP student must work 50 hours per month for a specific research project at the university.
•  The SSP student must report his/her study and research achievements to the dean of the Graduate School of Engineering at the end of each semester. The submitted report will be evaluated by the dean of the Graduate School of Engineering.

Number of Scholarships: Fifteen (15)

Scholarship benefits:

• Exemption from 30,000 yen entrance examination fee, 300,000 yen enrollment fee and 535,800 yen/year tuition fee
• To support living expenses, 150,000 yen/month is paid for research project work.
• 150,000 yen is provided for travel and initial living costs. (given only to international applicants who are living outside Japan, and who have, or have the intention to acquire, “Student” status of Japanese residence at the time of entry into Japan)

Duration of sponsorship: Doctoral Program will last for 3 years. Scholarship: 1 year.

The term will be extended for increments of one year up to a total of three years, unless the university terminates the SSP student status for any of the reasons stated in the Application Guidelines in the link below.

How to Apply

• (1) Choose one or two research project(s) from　the SSP Research Project List
• (2) Complete and submit all required documents by post. *Please refer to List for SSP Application Documents

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

Sponsor: The Kochi University of Technology (KUT)

Canada: CIFAR Azrieli Global Scholars Programme for International Researchers 2017

Application Deadline: 23rd May 2017

Eligible Countries: All

To be taken at (country): Canada

About the Award: Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, a Canadian-based global organization, brings together more than 400 researchers from 16 countries who are pursuing answers to some of the most difficult challenges facing the world. The CIFAR Azrieli Global Scholars program provides funding and support to help early career researchers build networks and essential skills to position them as leaders and agents of change within academia and beyond.

Fields of Research: In 2017, the eligible programs are:

Successful Societies
Institutions, Organizations & Growth
Cosmology & Gravity
Learning in Machines & Brains
Bio-inspired Solar Energy
Quantum Materials
Genetic Networks
Child & Brain Development
Humans & the Microbiome
Molecular Architecture of Life
Azrieli Program in Brain, Mind & Consciousness

Type:  Research/Grants

Eligibility: Applicants can be from anywhere in the world, but must hold a PhD (or equivalent) and be within five years of their first full-time academic appointment. Scholars’ research interests must be aligned with the themes of an eligible CIFAR research program.

Number of Awardees: Not specified

Value of Program: CIFAR Azrieli Global Scholars receive:

$100,000 CDN in undesignated research support
A two-year appointment to a CIFAR program aligned with their research interests
Mentorship from experienced researchers
Specialized leadership and communications skills training

Duration of Program: 2 years

How to Apply: Applications are submitted online through CIFAR’s application system and must include three letters of recommendation from at least one faculty member or equivalent and preferably one non-academic leader.

Please download the full program description for all eligibility and application requirements before applying

Visit Fellowship Webpage for details

Award Provider: Canadian Institute for Advanced Research