18 Mar 2017

Merkel and Trump hold crisis talks in Washington

Johannes Stern

With tensions between Germany and the US at their highest point since the end of the Second World War, the first meeting between President Donald Trump and German Chancellor Angela Merkel took place on Friday in Washington.
The mood was tense and cold. At a joint photo op in the Oval Office, Trump barely acknowledged Merkel and refused the customary handshake requested by photographers.
At a joint press conference following a White House meeting between Trump and Merkel, other officials and business leaders from the two countries, the two heads of state expressed agreement only on the questions of increased military spending and war. Merkel promised Trump that Germany would increase defence spending above the NATO minimum of two percent of GDP. In return, Trump pledged his commitment to NATO. They agreed “to work together hand in hand in Afghanistan and to collaborate on solutions in Syria and Iraq.”
The conflict between the two countries, which stood on opposite sides in two world wars in the first half of the twentieth century, emerged most sharply on the issue of trade policy. Trump complained that the past behaviour of US allies had often been “unfair” and he insisted on a “fair trade policy.”
What Trump means by this is clear. He threatened Germany with trade war in an interview he gave shortly before assuming office, specifically warning of import duties of up to 35 percent against the German automobile industry. Claiming that Germany’s behaviour toward the US was “very unfair,” he said he would make sure this ended.
In the past week, Trump’s economic advisor, Peter Navarro, once again referred to the German trade surplus as a “serious matter” and called it “one of the most difficult problems” for American trade policy. The US is currently preparing a so-called “border adjustment tax” that would substantially diminish taxes on American exports and place a heavy burden on German and other European imports.
The growing transatlantic conflicts were also reflected at the G20 finance ministers’ summit in Baden Baden, Germany. The previous evening, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble met for the first time with his new American counterpart, Steven Mnuchin. The former Wall Street banker insisted that the US did not want a trade war, but refused to support the inclusion in the closing G20 communiqué of the customary clear statement in favour of free trade and in opposition to protectionism.
Trump’s protectionism is a catastrophe in particular for the export-oriented German economy. In 2015, Germany achieved a record surplus of €260 billion, which corresponded to more than eight percent of its entire economic output. Trade with the US accounted for €54 billion of the surplus. In the previous year as well, the US provided the largest export market for German products, with a total value of €107 billion.
Merkel’s delegation included leading German economic representatives, who were tasked with convincing Trump of the importance of free trade. But while the German government struggles to de-escalate tensions with the US, it is simultaneously preparing retaliatory measures that are no less aggressive.
The deputy chairman of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) parliamentary faction, Carsten Schneider, threatened capital controls. “Ultimately, Germany is financing a large portion of the American trade deficit with its capital exports,” said Schneider. “If Trump does not relent, we must be ready to act.”
In a Friday morning interview with the German radio station Deutschlandfunk, German Economics Minister Brigitte Zypries (SPD) said: “The other possibility is simple. We will file suit against him before the World Trade Organization. It lays down procedures. In the WTO, it is clearly specified in the agreements that you are allowed to take no more than 2.5 percent in taxes on the import of automobiles.”
“This would not be the first time that Mr. Trump failed in the courts,” the SPD politician added provocatively.
The president of the Federation of German Industry (BDI), Dieter Kempf, asked Merkel prior to her trip to present Trump with “the standpoint of a German, a European economy… with appropriate self-confidence.” Trump’s views on economic policy would simply “not work,” he insisted.
In order to counter Trump in the most effective way, Berlin is pursuing a strategy of preparation for trade war between the US and the entire European Union. The Handelsblatt newspaper quoted the former chief economist of the Economics Ministry, Jeromin Zettelmeyer, as saying that Germany needs “the backing of the rest of Europe.” He went on to state, “They will have to wage a trade war against us if possible.”
According to a report in Der Spiegel, the aim of the German government is to “isolate the Americans.” To this end, EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstörm has been tasked with negotiating trade agreements “with other countries and regions of the world.” At the EU summit the previous week, the EU states spoke out against “protectionist tendencies” in world trade and positioned the European economy against the US, Der Spiegel reported.
The EU would “continue to collaborate actively with international trading partners,” said the final resolution of the EU summit. To this end, “progress will be achieved with decisiveness in all ongoing negotiations with regard to ambitious and well-balanced free trade agreements, including with Mercosur [a sub-regional bloc that includes Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela] and Mexico.” The negotiations with Japan are “close to a conclusion soon” and “trade relations with China should be strengthened on the basis of a common understanding of mutual and reciprocal benefit.”
Berlin and Brussels are expanding their economic relationships with precisely those countries that are in the crosshairs of the US government. Trump is threatening Mexico with the termination of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and Washington is pursuing a course toward war against China with increasing openness. The conflicts between Germany and the US will continue to sharpen as a consequence.
In a significant move, Merkel spoke on the telephone with Chinese President Xi Jinping immediately before traveling to Washington. She took this opportunity to express her opposition to protectionism. According to Merkel’s government spokesperson, Steffen Seibert, Merkel and Xi affirmed that they would “promote free trade and open markets together.” In addition, the two leaders agreed to “continue their trusting collaboration, especially within the framework of the German G20 presidency.”
Meanwhile, the German media is demanding “an even clearer statement against the new US protectionism” and urging that “the majority of other countries be mobilized against Trump.” This will be “necessary” in the future, said a comment in the Reinische Post. Germany and the EU must “self-confidently oppose” Trump with “their own contrary aims, instead of letting themselves be intimidated by Washington.” The conditions for this are favourable, the newspaper said.
It went on to state that it had become clear in Baden Baden that Germany has “not only the other EU states, but also almost the entire rest of the world—above all China, Brazil and Japan—on its side regarding trade policy.”
The fundamental reasons for Trump’s aggressive behaviour toward Berlin as well as Germany’s efforts to build a coalition against the US are to be found in the insoluble contradictions of the capitalist system itself. Capitalism is incapable of overcoming the contradiction between the international character of production and the national state. As on the eve of the First and the Second World Wars, the conflicts between the imperialist powers over raw materials, export markets, zones of influence and cheap labour are once again leading to trade war and military conflict.

US threats against North Korea and the danger of war in Asia

Andre Damon

With extreme recklessness, the Trump administration is charting a course toward war in the Asia-Pacific. From the response in the US media and political establishment, however, one would have no idea how dangerous the situation is, nor how incalculable the consequences.
The latest in the escalating war of words came from US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who said at a press conference in Seoul, South Korea on Friday that “all options are on the table” in dealing with North Korea. The comments came in advance of Tillerson’s visit today to China, North Korea’s main ally.
“Let me be very clear: the policy of strategic patience has ended,” the former CEO of ExxonMobil said, in what was widely interpreted as a rebuke to the Obama administration’s preference for economic sanctions in relation to North Korea. When asked about the possibility of a military response, Tillerson replied, “If they elevate the threat of their weapons program to a level that we believe requires action then that option is on the table.”
Echoing Tillerson’s threats, US President Donald Trump tweeted, “North Korea is behaving very badly. They have been ‘playing’ the United States for years. China has done little to help!”
If words have any meaning, the statements from Tillerson and Trump make clear that the US is preparing “pre-emptive” war, justified by North Korea’s reported plans to test an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of reaching the continental United States.
There is a staggering disconnect between the terrible consequences of such a war and the way it is being treated in the US media. Tillerson’s comments were greeted with a shrug on the network news programs Saturday evening. The Democrats have remained silent.
What would come from a US strike on North Korea? Would the crisis-ridden North Korean regime respond by firing missiles against Seoul or Tokyo? Would it use one of its nuclear weapons? Would a war against North Korea spiral into a direct conflict between the world’s two largest economies, the United States and China? These questions cannot be answered for certain, but all scenarios are possible.
One of the few comments addressing the character of a US war with North Korea came from retired Army Major Mike Lyons, a senior fellow for the Truman National Security Project. Writing in the Hill on Friday, Lyons said that US allies in the Pacific should begin “taking inventory of your military capability” and planning for a military operation that “could cause immediate casualties and destruction the world hasn’t seen since WWII.”
“We would have to literally blanket the sky for hours with air strikes,” Lyons wrote. The attack “would not focus on just military targets—there would be civilian casualties in the hundreds of thousands as well.” He further warned, “The war won’t go as planned for many reasons—if the North is successful in launching a nuclear weapon that destroys part of Seoul,” the US would likely be impelled to retaliate.
In other words, a war is being contemplated that could lead to the first combat use of nuclear weapons since the end of World War II.
Any military action in the tinder box of North East Asia can have far-reaching consequences, whatever the immediate intentions of the US may be. In recent weeks, the US and South Korea have engaged in large-scale military exercises; North Korea’s ambassador to the UN has warned that the “the Korean Peninsula is again inching to the brink of a nuclear war;” North Korea has test-fired missiles in the direction of Japan; and the US has begun deployment of an anti-ballistic missile system in South Korea that is directed primarily at China.
On Tuesday, Japan announced plans to dispatch its largest warship on a tour of the South China Sea, prompting protests from China.
The German newspaper Die Zeit commented earlier this week on escalating geopolitical tensions throughout the world: “Whether on purpose or accidentally, Trump could quickly get into a great war. Whether the United States, or anyone else, could emerge victorious from it, is doubtful.”
The recklessness of US actions testifies to the fact that the root of the spiraling conflict is not to be found in the Asia-Pacific, but rather in the United States, which is facing an unparalleled series of crises.
Despite its increasingly provocative threats against China and North Korea, the US alliance system in Asia is showing severe signs of strain. The impeachment of South Korean President Park Geun-hye was seen as a blow to US interests in the region. Meanwhile the Philippines, a key US ally, has reoriented toward China at the expense of the US.
Washington's European alliance system faces an even more dramatic breakdown. The same day that Tillerson made his threats against China, Trump and German Chancellor Angela Merkel held a press conference in which the NATO allies addressed each other effectively as adversaries.
At the same time, the Trump administration has proposed a budget that calls for cuts to domestic spending of over 30 percent in some departments, while adding some $52 billion to US military spending. The White House is pushing a health care overhaul that would gut Medicaid, the health care program for the poor and disabled, and cause more than 20 million people to lose health care coverage.
The imposition of these policies will lead to growing social discontent within the United States, which is already beset by record social inequality.
There is an element of madness in the Trump administration’s policies, but it is a madness rooted in the contradictions of American capitalism. The American ruling class depends upon constant war—both as a means of diverting social tensions outward, and as the principle mechanism for maintaining its global position under conditions of economic decline.
Responsibility for this policy does not end with the White House. Whatever their differences, all factions of the political establishment are agreed on the basic strategic imperative of world domination. As for the pseudo-left organizations, which take their line from the Democratic Party and ooze with the complacency of the upper-middle class layers for which they speak, one would never know from reading their publications that world war is an imminent possibility.
The greatest danger is that the working class, which does not want war, is unaware of the gravity of the situation and is not politically organized and mobilized to prevent it. Policies that will have catastrophic consequences for workers in the United States and internationally are being carried out behind their backs. This plays into the hands of the conspiratorial cabal in Washington.
The development of a socialist, anti-war movement in the United States and throughout the world is the most urgent political task.

Commonwealth Women’s Mentorship Scheme for Women from Commonwealth Countries 2017

Application Deadline: 30th April 2017.
Eligible Countries: Commonwealth Countries
To be taken at (country): The Caribbean and the Americas
About the Award: The Commonwealth Women’s Mentorship Scheme will match aspirational young women with experienced professionals in their fields.
Type: Short courses/Training
Eligibility: It is open to Commonwealth citizens between 18 and 29 who have demonstrated leadership and drive in their careers or in community projects.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value and Duration of Scholarship: The scheme will begin with a six-month pilot in the Caribbean and the Americas, but will include a small number of mentees from Africa, Europe, Australia and the Pacific.
How to Apply: Download and complete the application form (see in link below) below and email to cyouthmentorship@gmail.com
Award Provider: The Commonwealth

Western Union Scholars Program 2017 for Undergraduate Study in Students’ Chosen Institution.

Application Deadline: 12th April 2017
Selection & Notification to all Applicants: July 2017
Eligible Countries: All. Mostly developing countries
Fields of Study: Science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and business/entrepreneurship.
About the Award: The WU Scholars program was created to help give young people a boost toward a better life. The Western Union Foundation believes education is the surest path to economic opportunity. Educational pursuits to gain knowledge and skills for in-demand, 21st century careers are helping people all over the world climb the economic ladder.
To us, a better education means better employment opportunities. And with better employment opportunities comes improved earning potential. As Western Union CEO Hikmet Ersek says, “Education is powerful. It is the key to change and one key to financial dignity for all.” That financial dignity is what drives a better life for individuals, families, and communities around the world.
Type: Undergraduate
Eligibility: 
  • Scholarships must be used at an accredited post-secondary institution seeking an undergraduate degree.
  • All applicants must be pursuing a degree/field of study in one of the following categories: science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and business/entrepreneurship.
  • All applicants for scholarships must be between the ages of 18 – 26 years of age on June 1, 2017.
  • Application must be submitted in English. Translation services may be used to help non-English speakers submit. You will not be penalized for basic errors.
  • Must be able to demonstrate admittance to an accredited post-secondary institution or have applied for admittance.
  • Must provide a letter of recommendation from a teacher or professor. If a teacher or professor is unable to submit a recommendation on your behalf, you may also use someone who has supervised you in a youth/community group, volunteer position, job/employment situation, etc.
  • Scholarships must be used on programs resulting in an undergraduate degree. Specialized academic programs (study abroad term, stand-alone language acquisition course, service learning, etc.) are not permitted.
  • Scholarships may not be used for advanced degrees, such as Masters, PhD, JD, etc.
  • Scholarships may be used for tuition or school fees during the academic term immediately following scholarship winner selections (estimated in July). Funds cannot be used for room and board or for school supplies.
  • Immediate family members of controlling officers in Western Union, any of its affiliates and non-affiliated nonprofit entities, or its Agents are not eligible to participate in the scholarship program.
  • All other employees and their family members who meet the other eligibility requirements may apply.
Selection Criteria: Candidates will be selected based on criteria relating to the program’s three pillars: Perseverance, Aspiration, and Community.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: Selected scholarship recipients will receive USD $2,500 each to contribute toward tuition or school fees at an accredited post-secondary institution.
Duration of Scholarship: One-time
Award Provider: Western Union

Youth of Excellence Scheme of China (Yes China) Masters Scholarship for Developing Countries 2017/2018

Application Deadline: Please contact the Embassies or universities for the specific deadlines for 2017 applications.
Eligible Countries: Developing countries
To be taken at (Universities/Country): China
  1. Peking University
  2. Tsinghua University
  3. University of International Business and Economics
  4. Zhejiang University
  5. East China University of Political Science and Law
  6. South China University of Technology
  7. University of International Business and Economics
  8. Southeast University
About the Award: To promote the mutual understanding and friendship between China and other countries, and to provide education opportunities to the youths worldwide who enjoy good potentials in their career development, the Chinese Government established the “Scholarship for Youth of Excellence Scheme of China——Master Program (YES CHINA)” with the aim of providing financial support to the outstanding youth coming to China to pursue a Master’s degree.
The programs duration will be open to applicants from 56 developing countries.
Field of Study: The Master of Laws(LL.M.)Program in Chinese Law, International Program on Master of Public Health (IMPH), Master of International Economic Cooperation, Master of China Studies, The LL.M Program in International Economic Law, MBA Program, AIIB Master of International Finance, Master of One-Belt-Road Sustainable Infrastructure Engineering.
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  • Healthy both physically and mentally; not over 45 years old (born after September 1, 1972).
  • A bachelor or higher degree, at least 3 years’ work experience, some educational or professional experience in a field relative to that of the program applied.
  • Working in a government agency, company or research institute, and being a Section Director or Chief of Office, a senior manager, or excellent in scientific researches.
  • Good English language proficiency, able to follow English-taught courses well. Minimum requirements for reference: IELTS (Academic) total score 6.0, or TOEFL Internet score 80.
  • Having a strong development potential in his/her career, and willing to promote the mutual cooperation and exchanges between China and his/her home country.
  • Students who are now studying in China or already winners of Chinese Government Scholarship are not allowed to apply. Note: More details about each program can be found in the corresponding university’s recruitment prospectus.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: 
1. One-year Program: Total Amount: 200,800 RMB per year for each student, covering:
  •  Exempted fees: registration fees, tuition fees, laboratory experiment fees, internship fees, and fees for basic learning materials.
  •  On-campus accommodation.
  •  Living Allowance (96,000 RMB per year for each student).
  •  One-off settlement subsidy after registration (3,000 RMB for each student).
  •  Comprehensive medical insurance.
  •  A one-way air ticket to China upon registration and a one-way air ticket back from China to the student’s home country after completion of the study.
2. Two-year Program (1+1 studies)
Scholarship for the first academic year is the same as One-year Program. In the second academic year, students will do their thesis back in their home countries and the dissertation defense in China, while the scholarship will only cover one round-trip ticket for dissertation defense.
Duration of Scholarship: The programs duration will be one year or two years.  Academic year from September, 2017
How to Apply: The applicants should submit their applications during the application period to the Chinese Embassy in their countries of nationality, or to the 7 program universities.
Award Provider: Government of China
Important Notes: More details about each program can be found in the corresponding university’s recruitment prospectus.

Africa Day 2017 Writing Competition for Young African Writers

Application Deadline:  Wednesday, 3rd May 2017
Africa Day Dublin 2017 will take place on Sunday, 21st May!
Eligible Countries: Countries in Africa, Ireland
To Be Taken at (Country): Dublin, Ireland
About the Award: The short story and poetry competition, which is in its third year, seeks to discover new writing talent, as well as showcase established writers. Interested? Here’s how to get involved:
Writers are invited to submit a short story or poem with an African theme, set in either Ireland or Africa. The Irish Times and Irish Aid are looking for entries in three categories:
  • Primary school (maximum word count 250 words)
  • Secondary school (maximum word count 1,000 words)
  • Adult (maximum word count 2,000 words)
Type: Contest
Eligibility: Entries are invited in three categories: Primary School, Secondary School and Adult. Writers are invited to submit a short story or poem with an African theme, set in either Ireland or Africa. Primary-school children can submit a piece of up to 250 words and secondary school students of up to 1,000 words. The word count for entries from adults is 2,000 words.
Selection:  Winners will be chosen by a panel made up of representatives from Irish Aid and The Irish Times.
Number of Awardees:  Not specified
Value of Contest: The winning entries will be published on www.irishtimes.com on Sunday, 21stMay, the same day as the flagship Africa Day event in Dublin. Winners will receive a selection of books to the value of €50 each. There will also be a photographic presentation at The Irish Times.
How to Apply: Submissions for all categories can be made via email to africaday@dhr.ie, putting “Writing Competition” in the subject line, or by post to “Africa Day Writing Competition, DHR Communications, 80 Francis Street, Dublin 8”. Submissions for the adult and secondary school category must be typed. Entries for the primary school category may be handwritten.
Award Provider: Irish Aid, Irish Times

African Investigative Journalism Conference (AIJC) Fellowships for African Journalists 2017. Funded to Johannesburg, South Africa

Application Deadline: 15th May 2017
Eligible Countries: Countries in Africa
To be taken at (country): Johannesburg, South Africa
About the Award: The Global Investigative Journalism Conference (GIJC) is the premier international gathering of investigative and data journalists, held once every two years. This year, the 10th conference will be held in Johannesburg, South Africa, from November 16 to 19, and is being co-hosted by the Global Investigative Journalism Network and the Wits University Journalism Programme. GIJC17 incorporates this year’s African Investigative Journalism Conference and will feature more than 120 exciting panels, workshops, and networking sessions, ranging from cross-border collaboration and corruption to advanced data analysis. Here’s a chance to learn from the best in the field and enhance your skills with the latest tips and tools.
With the support of our sponsors, GIJN and Wits Journalism are offering fellowships to both established and young promising journalists in developing and transitioning countries to participate in this prestigious event. Competition is keen so you need to convince us that you’ll make great use of the training GIJC17 offers.
Type: Fellowship, Events and Conferences
Eligibility: 
  • Open to full-time print, online, television, video, and multimedia journalists in developing or transitioning countries
  • Experience in investigative or data journalism a plus
Number of Awardees: 40 – 60
Value of Fellowship: 
  • Round-trip airfare to Johannesburg, South Africa
  • Hotel room for four nights
  • Transport between Johannesburg airport and the conference hotel
  • Breakfast and lunch on conference days
  • Award ceremony banquet dinner
  • Conference fee
Following the conference, fellows are required to either produce a story or give a presentation in your home country, based on what you learned at the conference.
Duration of Fellowship: from November 16 to 19
How to Apply: Apply on the Fellowship Webpage (Link below)
Award Provider: The Global Investigative Journalism Network (GIJN) and Wits Journalism
Important Notes: The fellowship does not include a per diem, visa fees, or transport to and from your home country airport. Fellows are expected to pay for these costs.

School of Data Fellowship for Data Enthusiasts 2017

Application Deadline: 2nd April 2017
About the Award: Fellowships are nine-month placements with School of Data for data-literacy practitioners or enthusiasts. During this time, Fellows work alongside School of Data to build an individual programme that will make use of both the collective experience of School of Data’s network to help Fellows gain new skills, and the knowledge that Fellows bring along with them, be it about a topic, a community or specific data literacy challenges.
Similarly to previous years, our aim with the Fellowship programme is to increase awareness of data literacy and build communities who together, can use data literacy skills to make the change they want to see in the world.
Type: Fellowship
Eligibility: The 2017 Fellowship will continue the thematic approach pioneered by the 2016 class. As a result, we will be prioritising candidates who:
  • possess experience in, and enthusiasm for, a specific area of data literacy training
  • can demonstrate links with an organisation practising in this defined area and/or links with an established network operating in the field
We are looking for engaged individuals who already have in-depth knowledge of a given sector and have been reflecting on the data literacy challenges faced in the field. This will help Fellows get off to a running start and achieve the most during their time with School of Data: nine months fly by!
Selection Criteria: The School of Data will consequently prioritise individuals who:
  • possess relevant experience and expertise in the technical areas our local partners need help with
  • can demonstrate a strong interest in the field of activity of the civil society organisation they will be supporting
Number of Awardees: Up to 10
Value of Fellowship: While Fellows will be focused on ironing their skills as data trainers and build a community around them, Experts will focus on supporting and training a civil society organisation or newsroom with a specific project. Fellows will receive a monthly stipend of $1,000 USD a month to cover for their work. Experts, who will have a planning with more variations, will receive a total stipend of $10,500 USD over the course of the programme.
In May, both Experts and Fellows will come together during an in-person Summer Camp (location to be decided) to meet their peers, build and share their skills, and learn about the School of Data way of training people on data skills.
Duration of Fellowship: April – December 2017
Award Provider: School of Data

Best Way to Aid Africa

Cesar Chelala

Drought in Somalia threatens the lives of almost half the population, according to Somalia’s Prime Minister Hassan Ali Khaire. Over a two-day span, at least 110 people died of hunger in just a single region in the country. This highlights the tremendous needs Somalia and other African countries have for immediate help.
In the last few decades, enormous financial resources have been sent to the region. What has been accomplished, however, is subject to controversy since what has been achieved appears to have been counterproductive to Africa’s actual needs.
In spite of the considerable progress achieved in the fight against HIV/AIDS, other health problems remain. Although the Ebola epidemic has been largely controlled, the potential for a new epidemic still exists. Countries are now better prepared to deal with a new outbreak, but probably not to the extent that a serious new epidemic would demand.
Tuberculosis is still rampant in South Africa, which has the highest tuberculosis death rate per capita worldwide, followed by Zimbabwe and Mozambique. Worse yet, the high number of cases of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in several countries make the disease much more difficult to treat.
Five children under age five die every minute in the African region, two thirds of them from preventable causes. Diarrheal and respiratory infections, malaria, measles and malnutrition represent big threats to children’s health. Pneumonia and malaria are the leading causes of death among children under five years of age. The interaction of under nourishment and infection can lead to a vicious cycle of worsening illness and deteriorating nutritional status.
Health problems in Africa cannot be considered in isolation from the countries’ sociopolitical and environmental realities, and require continued foreign technical and financial assistance. Increasing efforts are needed to be made to expand access to primary health care, especially in rural areas, accompanied by health promotion, disease prevention and improved health education activities. The relentless exodus of physicians and nurses to industrialized countries only compounds health problems.
Despite some progress in the social sphere, some important difficulties remain. One of them is significant unemployment, particularly among the young. Around 70 percent of the population in Sub-Saharan Africa is under the age of 30, and 60 percent of the unemployed are also young people. New policies are indispensable to incorporate them into the labor force.
A first step is to provide youth with basic skills so that they can achieve their earning potential. UNESCO and the International Labor Organization (ILO) have recommended that governments, international donors and the private sector develop integrated policies to create jobs for young people and ease the transition from school to work.
Poverty in the continent is widespread and affects most of the population. In 2010, more than 400 million people were living in extreme poverty across Sub-Saharan Africa. Currently, a notable proportion of women lack any significant income. The expansion of micro credit together with rural development projects mainly aimed at women could significantly improve the situation.
Education is another area of concern. Africa has the lowest rate of children in primary schools of any region. In addition to significant gender disparities, with girls far behind boys in educational attainment, geographical disparities between rural areas and urban areas, and economic disparities between low income and high income households are also significant.
Many experts on Africa don’t believe in the efficacy of aid. “Money from rich countries has trapped many African nations in a cycle of corruption, slower economic growth and poverty. Cutting off the flow would be far more beneficial,” wrote Dambisa Moyo, a Zambian-born international economist and author with extensive knowledge of Africa.
Aid, however, can become effective in improving people’s standard of living and education. It is critical to help African countries improve governance before providing financial assistance. In addition, effective aid must bypass corrupt governments and find ways of helping people in more direct ways, such as through community and religious organizations.
Although considerable amount of money has been sent to Africa through bilateral and international aid, there are still no effective mechanisms in place to monitor and make recipients accountable for spending. This is a vital, since corruption is like a weed that saps the countries’ social fabric and energy. In addition, there are not enough ways to evaluate the quality of projects funded mainly by international lending institutions and UN agencies.
Aid to Africa should be aimed at strengthening civil society and community-based organizations. African countries need better trade conditions for their products and technical assistance that is carefully and responsibly planned. Provided with a generous nature and energetic and hard working people, Africa is still a continent of hope.

Colonialist Assault on Puerto Rico and the Prospects for Independence

W.T. Whitney Jr.

“Porto Rico (sic) is not forgotten and we mean to have it.” Senator Henry Cabot Lodge was reassuring his friend Theodore Roosevelt. According to the New York Times, Puerto Ricans are an “uneducated, simple-minded and harmless people who are only interested in wine, women, music and dancing.”  The subject at hand for the Times, one year after the U. S. military invasion of 1898, was “Americanizing Puerto Rico.”
Upper –class haughtiness set the stage for victimization of the many by the wealthy few. Now the U. S. Congress is forcing Puerto Rico’s government to make payments on $72 billion in debt owed to U. S. banks and hedge funds.  People’s basic needs are being ignored.
The Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA), passed in June 2016, created a “financial control board” that has become “the de facto government, banker, judge, jury, and executioner of Puerto Rico,” according to critic Nelson Denis.
That board on March 8, 2017 called upon Puerto Rico’s government to take emergency steps to avoid running out of money. The next day it rejected Governor Ricardo Rossello’s plan offering annual interest payments of $1.2 billion, a far cry from the  almost $6 billion actually required. But on March 11 the board accepted a revised plan; interest payments would be $800 million a year. Government pensions would be reduced and employees furloughed.  Christmas bonuses are out.
The University of Puerto Rico faces a $300 million budgetary cut and 300 public schools will be closing. The board wants to shrink healthcare spending despite reductions from 12.3 percent of the GDP in 2010 to 10.5 percent in 2014. A 50- per cent minimum-wage cut for younger workers is possible.  The retirement age, gasoline and sales taxes, and electricity rates have inched up over five years. Pensions and benefits have diminished.
Most Puerto Ricans have been used to troubles since the U. S. take-over in 1898. Now, the overall poverty rate is 45 percent; 57 percent of children live in poverty. Unemployment officially is 12.6 percent of the workforce, but only 40 percent of adults belong to the workforce. Food prices are high partly because Puerto Rico produces only 10 percent if its food.
Emigration to the United States has been a hedge against misery; as of 2008, 400,000 more Puerto Ricans were living there than in Puerto Rico. Government authorities in both countries worried about a “surplus population,” says clinical psychologist Jorge A. Montijo.  By 1965, 35 percent of Puerto Rican women of childbearing age had been surgically sterilized.
The new rulers quickly changed Puerto Rico to their liking. By 1901 both U. S. exports to and imports from the island had quadrupled. U. S. owners controlled 70,060 acres in tobacco – up from 5529 acres – and 141,248 acres in sugar cane – up from 21,505 acres; 85 percent of the island’s manufacturing was in U. S. hands. As of 1928, four sugar syndicates owned over half of all arable land.
Legal arrangements facilitated U. S. control of the island’s economy and political life. An “Organic Charter” in April 1900 handed control of Puerto Rico to the U. S. Congress.  Another such law in 1917 gave Puerto Ricans U. S. citizenship (without representation in Congress) – just in time for them to be drafted as soldiers in World War I. Congress’ “Law 600” of 1950 allowed for a Puerto Rican Constitution and declared Puerto Rico to be a “Free Associated State,” a label used to persuade the United Nations General Assembly to remove Puerto Rico from its list of colonized territories.
Congress reserved the right to approve that Constitution before it took effect; its provisions would always give way to U. S. laws. It specified that “payment of interest and amortization of the debt [is] the first priority.”
Other legal straitjackets: Congress’ Merchant Marine Act (Jones Act) of 1920 required that cargoes going from one U.S. port to another – Puerto Rico included – be carried in a U. S. owned and operated ship, with a U. S. crew. Shipping costs went up as did prices for imported goods. And, rejecting a defendant’s claim of protection from double jeopardy, the Supreme Court ruled June 9, 2016 that Puerto Ricans bow to only one sovereign, the federal government.
Today, left-over effects of Section 936 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code are ravaging the daily lives of most Puerto Ricans, or soon will be.  Regulations imposed in 1976 exempted U.S. companies operating in Puerto Rico from paying taxes on income or capital gains. U. S. investors would pay no taxes on dividends paid by those companies. And taxes weren’t due on U. S. investments deposited in Puerto Rican banks.
Section 936 was “nothing but a welfare program for the Fortune 500,” said a tax attorney. U. S. companies in Puerto Rico generated $14.3 billion in income in 1995 alone. The island’s economy grew. Meanwhile successive governments were relying on “multi-million” dollar loans to make up for sharply reduced tax collections. Federal monies flowed to the island and public -sector hiring increased. Government leaders and citizens fell into dependency.
Then, beginning in the 1990s and ending in 2006, authorities in Washington phased out Section 936. U. S. companies closed operations in Puerto Rico or cut back production. Industrial jobs fell by one third.  Between 2006 and 2014 Puerto Rico’s GDP contracted by 13 percent, thus “provoking a new wave of migration,” with heavy middle class representation. Soon “Puerto Rico [was] essentially running on bonds held by U.S.-based banks and corporations” – and hedge funds. The PROMESA law came to their rescue.
Puerto Ricans are resisting. Students at various branches of the University of Puerto Rico marched and demonstrated in late February against threats to schools and University programs. Teachers joined them, pointing to poorly-paid professors now being hired on short-term contracts. The Communist Party’s Abayarderojo newspaper labeled school closings and reorganization of educational districts into independent entities, which is contemplated, as “war on public education.”
The struggle to shed Puerto Rico’s colonial status is at low ebb.  The Independence Party has gained little support from voters in recent elections and in referenda on relations with the United States. Most Puerto Ricans have voted either for one party inclined toward statehood or another tending toward autonomy. Nowhere to be found is high – profile, anti-colonial agitation centering on exploitation of the working class.
It was different once. From the 1930s into the early 1950s, the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party propelled the independence movement. Pedro Albizu Campos, the Party’s president told members that, “We will immediately free the worker from labor leaders disoriented by the Yankees … who have him carrying the North American flag, whose dark shadow reigns over this colonial government that has converted us into slaves of North American corporations and businesses.”
The first item of the Party’s economic program spoke of “organization of workers so they can demand from foreign interests or invaders participation in gains to which they have a right.” Albizu maintained that workers are “the true power and true source of wealth belonging to the homeland.”  Striking sugar cane workers in 1934 called upon Albizu Campos to lead their strike.
The Nationalist Party faded after terrible repression including massacres and imprisonment of leaders. Albizu Campos served two long terms in prison, where he was tortured.  The story was otherwise in Cuba; there, revolutionaries brought two struggles together, one for national sovereignty, the other for social justice.
Alejandro Torres Rivera, leader of the National Hostos Independence Movement and a lawyer, provides commentary as relevant to Puerto Ricans’ resistance today as it was to the Nationalists he was writing about:
“[T]o have the national demand for independence be taken up by a social class like the working class made for a more persuasive questioning of the colonialist and imperialist project of the United States in Puerto Rico.   Imperialism was also aware of the danger to its interests from the political demand for liberty, sovereignty, and independence being merged in a common program with the social and economic claims of the working classes of Puerto Rico.”