29 Mar 2017

Westerwelle Young Founders Programme for Young Entrepreneurs in Developing Countries 2017 (Fully-funded to Germany)

Application Deadline: 30th April 2017
Offered Annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: All African and Developing countries
To be taken at (country): Berlin, Germany/Applicant’s Home Country
About the Award: As part of the Young Founders Programme, the Westerwelle Foundation hosts a Young Founders Conference in Berlin, 13 to 16 September 2017. Its focus is to connect young founders from developing and emerging economies with each other and with the German startup scene. The participants of the Young Founders Conference 2017 will have the unique opportunity to meet and interact with successful German entrepreneurs and political decision makers and will join a network of like-minded outstanding young founders from developing and emerging countries.
During the one year long Young Founders Programme, participants will get access to:
  • The Young Founders Conference in Berlin, 13 to 16 September 2017
  • A mentoring programme
  • Invitations and scholarships for entrepreneurship conferences
  • Online coaching and webinars
  • An international alumni network
Type: Entrepreneurship
Eligibility: Applicants should:
  • Have recently (0-5 years) started a for-profit company with a scalable business model
  • Be based in a developing or emerging country or have a strong business focus on developing and emerging countries
  • Possess a good working knowledge of English
Foreign applicants must possess valid travel documents (including a visa, if necessary) to enter Germany, and valid travel medical insurance.
Selection: Applicants will first be shortlisted according to their written application. The shortlisted candidates will then be invited for a Skype interview. Results of written application and Skype interview will be discussed by a jury and the selected candidates will be invited to participate at the Young Founders Programme.
Value of Program:  Travel and accommodation will be covered by the Westerwelle Foundation.
Duration of Program: 1 year
How to Apply: The application form is open until 30 April 2017 at http://yfp.westerwelle-foundation.com.
Award Provider: Westerwelle Foundation.

Workshop on Migration & Development for African Journalists 2017 by taz Panter Foundation. Fully-funded to Germany

Application Deadline: 9th April 2017
Eligible Countries: African countries
To be taken at (country): Berlin, Germany
About the Award: The EU has been working to improve the quality of life in the country. Germany is an important player in this process. Chancellor Angela Merkel visited several African states in the autumn of 2016, the Federal Government. Today, Africa is one of the most important focuses of the German G20 presidency.
Taz newspaper, a German media outfit is therefore inviting ten professional journalists working for African media (print, online, radio, TV). We especially encourage female journalists to apply.
The program focuses on German and European migration policy, giving special attention to:
  • the EU’s ” Valletta process ” of the EU
  • the German G20 Presidency with the “G20 Africa Partnership Summit”
  • the German government’s ” Marshall Plan with Africa “. Further topics are German and European refugee policy and German colonial history in Africa.
Type: Events/Training
Eligibility: 
  • Applicants must be professional journalists working for African media (print, online, radio, TV).
  • Female journalists are especially encouraged to apply.
Number of Awardees: 10
Value of Program: The program is free of charge for the participants. Accommodation and travel costs are covered by the taz Panter foundation. Taz takes care of accommodation, catering and travel arrangements and helps with visa applications for Germany. G20 Africa Partnership Summit or the Global Forum on Migration and Development (see above).The costs for any additional stay in Germany before or after the workshop must be borne by the participants themselves.
Duration of Program: June 21 to 27
How to Apply: The application form can be downloaded here
Please send it with a CV and three work samples to africaworkshop@taz.de
Award Provider: Taz
Important Notes: The workshop will be held in English, but translation into French will be provided if necessary.

NNPC/Chevron Limited JV Scholarship for Undergraduate Nigerian Students 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 9th April 2017
Offered Annually? Yes
About the Award: Chevron Nigeria Limited, in collaboration with its Joint Venture partner, the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), is offering a number of Chevron Scholarship Awards to suitably qualified undergraduate students in Nigerian Universities. Full-time second year (200level) students studying specific courses listed below, in Nigerian Universities, are invited to apply online.
Eligible Fields of Study: E-applications are invited from full-time SECOND YEAR (200 LEVEL) degree students of the under-listed courses, in Nigerian Universities:
·         Accountancychevron scholarship
·         Agricultural Engineering/Agricultural Science
·         Architecture
·         Business Administration/Economics
·         Chemical Engineering
·         Civil Engineering
·         Computer Science
·         Electrical/Electronic Engineering
·         Environmental Studies/Surveying
·         Geology/Geophysics
·         Law
·         Mass Communication/Journalism
·         Mechanical/Metallurgical & Materials Engineering
·         Human Medicine/Dentistry/Pharmacy
·         Petroleum Engineering
Application Guidelines1. Before you start this application, ensure you have clear scanned copies of the following documents
  • Passport photograph with white background not more than 3 months old (450px by 450px not more than 200kb)
  • School ID card
  • Admission letter
  • Birth certificate
  • O’ Level result
  • JAMB Result
  • Local Government Area Letter of Identification
2. Ensure the documents are named according to what they represent to avoid mixing up documents during upload
3. Ensure you attach the appropriate documents when asked to upload
How to Apply for Chevron Scholarship
Important Notes: Please note that applicants for the NNPC/CNL JV scholarship are ineligible to apply for any other scholarship program sponsored by Chevron Nigeria Limited, its JV Partners, or any of its affiliates, including the Agbami scholarship program published simultaneously with this NNPC/CNL JV scholarship program.

Rwanda Indicts French Generals for 1994 Genocide

Thomas C. Mountain

Late in 2016 the Rwandan Government indicted several senior French Army Generals for crimes against humanity including genocide for their role in the 1994 Rwandan holocaust.
The Rwandan case against the French Generals is based on the French having instigated and trained the Interhamwe para-military Hutu militia that was responsible for most of the killings of the minority Tutsi tribe and its supporters. This most inconvenient of facts is admitted to by the French media who are still trying to shrug off blame for the French crimes in Rwanda and deny any “smoking gun” exists.
This latest in a long series of Rwandan government exposés of the French Military and Foreign Ministry’s role in the 1994 mass murder(some 800,000 by most accounts) provides that very “smoking gun”, for the well documented French Military role in the very existence of the Interhamwe death squads in undeniable.
Who is going to believe that after creating, training and paying the salaries of the leadership, the French had no idea the Interhamwe ethnic death squads were going to carry out what they were broadcasting so rabidly? It goes further, for the evidence shows the French were actually behind the mass murder in just another storm of massacre and mayhem that typifies neo colonial French Africa.
All one has to do is view the excellent three-part series on Aljazeera “The French African Connection” to hear first-hand senior French Intelligence agents matter of factly describe coup d’etas and mass murder they directed in the years before the Rwandan genocide throughout neo-colonial French Africa. After watching the series tell me you still don’t believe the French were capable of the crimes committed in Rwanda in 1994?
Earlier in 2016 news broke about the French role in suppressing the anti-neo-colonial rebellion that broke out in Cameroon in the 1970s where over 10,000 Cameroonian’s were murdered by the Cameroon Army directed by French officers. All to maintain French control of their former “colonies” and continue the super exploitation of African resources that is critical to maintaining the high standards of living the French people have come to expect.
The French military is still very active in enforcing neo-colonialism in French Africa, with contingents and or training operations in Mali, Central African Republic, Congo, Djibouti and Cote d’Ivoire. France has been at the forefront in demanding military intervention in Burundi by the UN, offering military forces for a potential occupation. French neo colonialism remains a potent force of reaction in Africa today and recognizing the French role in the Rwandan genocide in 1994 can play a vital role in helping the world understand this thorn in the side of the African peoples fight for independence, social equality and justice. Rwanda indicting French Generals for genocide is a good start.

Human Rights are Animal Rights!

Peter Tatchell

Since we humans are an animal species, it is obvious that human rights are a form of animal rights; and that animal rights include – or should include – the human species.
Sadly, not everyone sees it this way. Many view humans and other animals as totally distinct: drawing a clear, sharp line between animal rights and human rights.
That’s not my view. Sentience is the bond that unites all animal species, human and non-human. I accept our shared animalism and advocate our shared claim to be spared suffering and accorded inalienable rights.
It is true that other animals are less intelligent than humans and lack our mental-physical skills and our capacity for culture and conscience. But this is no justification for abusing them. Just as we do not sanction the abuse of humans – such as babies and disabled people – who lack these highly developed capacities.
We accept that we have a special responsibility to protect weaker, more vulnerable humans. Surely the same reasoning applies to other weaker, more vulnerable thinking, feeling creatures?
There is, in my moral universe, no great ethical gulf between the abuse of human and non-human animals or between our duty of compassion towards other humans and other species.
Indeed, I see a link between the oppression of non-human animals and the oppression of human beings because of their nationality, race, gender, faith or non-faith, political beliefs, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity.
Speciesism is analogous to homophobia, racism and misogyny
The different forms of human and other animal oppression are interconnected, based on the similar abuse of power and the infliction of harm and suffering. They cannot be fully understood separately from one another.
How we mistreat animals parallels how we mistreat people. Cruelty is barbarism, whether it is inflicted on humans or on other species. The campaigns for animal rights and human rights share the same fundamental aim: a world without oppression and suffering, based on love, kindness and compassion.
Speciesism is the belief and practice of human supremacism over other animal species. It is prejudice, discrimination or violence in favour of human beings; variously involving the exploitation, incarceration, mistreatment or killing of other animals by humans.
This humans-first ideology of speciesism is analogous to homophobia, racism and misogyny. A form of prejudice, domination and oppression, it is incompatible with a humane, civilised society.
We humans are an animal species. We know about pain and suffering. So why do most of us hold high-handed attitudes towards other animals and accept their abuse in medical laboratories, farms, zoos, circuses and sports events?
It does not follow that our highly sophisticated intelligence and material development gives us the right to lord it over other species. Just because we have the capacity to do so, does not mean that we should. On the contrary: our brain power and conscience give us a special responsibility of stewardship over the Earth and all its beings.
We must start thinking in a new way …
My thinking has been influenced by the Australian philosopher, Peter Singer, and his ground-breaking book, Animal Liberation. In my mind, it is one the most important books of the last 100 years. It expands our moral horizons beyond our own species and is thereby a major evolution in ethics.
Singer challenges human chauvinism. By viewing non-human sentient beings as ‘other’, we allow ourselves the ‘excuse’ to look down on and mistreat them; including to insult, exploit, abuse, dominate or even kill those ‘other’ beings. We stop seeing them as living, thinking, feeling creatures.
Anti-animal prejudice runs deep. Bigots often disparage other people with speciesist epithets. They accuse them of acting ‘just like a beast’ or ‘worse than an animal.’ This bigotry echoes the vile insults that black people are ‘savages’, women are ‘bitches’ and that LGBT people are ‘perverts.’
Before we can liberate the millions of oppressed humans and billions of exploited animals we need to free our minds and start thinking in a new way: to consciously eliminate the mentality of subjugation and entitlement that allows us to passively acquiesce or, even worse, actively participate in the cycle of abuse against other sentient beings – human and non-human.
Animal liberation is in the same ethical tradition as women’s, black and LGBT liberation. It is about ending the suffering that flows from a supremacist mindset and power relations of domination.
Surely, in the twenty-first century, the time has come to emancipate non-human animals, just like we previously emancipated humans through abolishing slavery, male-only suffrage and anti-LGBT laws?
We have a moral duty to stop abusing other animal species. They aren’t really that different from us humans. Vertebrates share much of our DNA and our capacity for thought, feelings, emotions, sociability, language, altruism and empathy.
We need to recognise and accept our common animal nature. If we did that, the excuses and rationalisations for treating other species badly would fall away.

Does Washington Want to Start a New War in the Balkans?

DAVID KOWALSKI

With Monday’s procedural vote in the U.S. Senate to allow Montenegro into NATO, the Washington elite proved once more that heightening tensions with Russia might not just be inevitable, but actually desirable. With the exception of Rand Paul (R-KY) and Mike Lee (R-UT), the entire 100-strong body of the Senate rallied behind the motion that would see the tiny Adriatic state admitted into the Atlantic alliance over the objections of many Montenegrins . The vote set off a 30-hour countdown, during which Senators will debate before putting the issue to a final vote.
If you needed more proof that US foreign policy is misguided, just look to what happened to Rand Paul after his earlier decision to block Montenegro’s accession.  The Kentucky senator was subjected to a barrage of insults from fellow Republican John McCain, who flatly accused Paul of “working for Vladimir Putin.” McCain warned Paul that objecting to the tiny Balkan state becoming the 29th member of the alliance would play straight into the hands of the Russian president. While certainly unkind, Paul’s retort that the 80-year-old might be “past his prime” and perhaps “a little bit unhinged” was not entirely wide of the mark.
While Montenegro’s accession to NATO bafflingly enjoys popular support in the Senate chamber and among NATO’s 28 member states, 25 of whom have already finalized their approval of the country’s membership of the alliance, criticism of Paul’s veto is as grossly misguided as any assertion that he is somehow in the pocket of the Kremlin. Correctly arguing that the U.S. is already spread far too thinly militarily in dozens of countries all over the world with little to show for it, Paul questioned the wisdom of expanding the monetary and military obligations of America at a time when it is already drowning in debt. He had previously voted against the matter in a vote last December.
McCain represents a mercilessly hawkish wing of the Republican Party that would be quite happy to risk war with Russia and harm to U.S. interests over such a strategically irrelevant country. Paul, on the other hand, takes a more pragmatic position on the country’s NATO ambitions, as should anyone in full possession of the facts. To begin with, the Montenegrin people themselves display little interest in their country joining NATO. Polls there consistently show that no more than 40% of the public favor NATO membership, with support for accession dropping considerably below that figure among older people. Many remain suspicious of the alliance after it bombed Yugoslavia, of which Montenegro was part, in 1999. Distrust for the military alliance is so strong that anti-NATO demonstrations regularly take place across the country. To press ahead with Montenegro’s NATO accession would fly directly in the face of the will of its people.
Worse, Montenegro’s October parliamentary election was marred with exaggerated charges that a Russian coup was in the works. If it hadn’t been for some last minute intelligence from Serbia and the country’s own agencies, so the story goes, Russian GRU spies would have assassinated Djukanovic and would have installed a puppet government. In fact, the pro-Western Podgorica government has successfully used the specter of Russian influence in order to detain and unlawfully harass opposition leaders. Just last week, Marko Milacic, a pro-neutrality campaigner, was “pre-emptively detained” after campaigning in favor of a referendum that would have allowed Montenegrins to vote on whether they want indeed to join NATO.
Aside from the lack of public support, Montenegro has very little to meaningfully contribute to the alliance. Indeed, its accession would seriously undermine the democratic principles on which the transatlantic community was ostensibly founded. The country’s government is widely accepted to be riddled with corruption. Former Prime Minister Milo Dukanovic was named Man of the Year in Organized Crime by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) in 2015, and has been accused of cigarette smuggling on a grand scale in collusion with notorious organized crime groups from Italy, among a litany of other offences any mobster would be proud to have on their resume. Since standing down from his role as Prime Minister last year, Djukanovic has managed to cleverly maneuver the domestic political sphere by intimidating opposition leaders, while skillfully managing to avoid accusation of a “political crackdown” that would have ignited wide-spread civil unrest.
Montenegro’s accession to full NATO membership should also be viewed as no-brainer from a financial perspective. The fact remains that Podgorica currently spends just 1.6% of its GDP on defense and has a miniscule army. As the Senate Armed Services Chairman, John McCain has been busy campaigning for a greater military budget of $640 billion for 2018 to entangle U.S. forces in further conflicts abroad, proving once more that the former Presidential candidate is stuck in a Cold War mentality, as evidenced by his suggestion that Paul is some sort of Kremlin plant.
Republicans and the White House must look beyond this bluster and carefully consider the ramifications of allowing Montenegro’s NATO accession. Accepting a country with a failing economy and corrupt government into the alliance will do nothing to further U.S interests either at home or abroad. On the contrary, allowing Montenegro to join NATO would jeopardize both regional and U.S. security, and perpetuate the mistakes of past administrations that have been too quick to bomb foreign countries on a whim and play geopolitical games.
McCain’s tired brand of rampant interventionism should be consigned to the dustbin of history, while the rest of the Senate should take careful note of Paul’s important points. He is one of a rare breed of lawmakers brave enough to criticize America’s imperialism abroad.

What Cost Liberty? Civilians In The “Liberation” Of Mosul

Binoy Kampmark


Bombs do not have a conscience, however named, blessed or created.  They go, at least in a rough sense, where directed, and if the deliverer is ill disposed, confused or simply incompetent, disaster follows.  Between the ideological rants and principled feelings about killing the enemy, there is only one fact worth nothing: death and the ordinance used to cause it are intimately twinned.
The very concept of a moralised arsenal, or a principled form of humanitarian liberation, is always problematic.  An “arsenal for democracy” against the arsenal of a thousand year Reich, a theme dating from the Second World War, is symbolic rather than functional, based on discriminations artificially made. At the end of any war or battle, however intentioned, is a stocked grave.
The narrative on fighting Islamic State is this: good guys size up bad guys and the former will triumph in a dark-light narrative of childish simplicity.  But consequentially, it is always difficult to distinguish a Bomber Harris, architect of the Dresden bombing of 1945 that had no military value, from the camp commander who orders murderous gas for extermination camps. We can well draw distinctions about how wars begin, and regimes behind them, but the methods of war, including their outcomes, are also important.
Put the treacle-pudding guff of humanitarian virtue to the side, and what matters is the result, which usually involves fresh graves strewn over fields of dissolved hopes.  Politics tends to follow, patching such matters up with comforting cosmetics.  Islamic State is an enemy of certain cherished values, which is deemed more than sufficient in terms of getting onto a plane and unleashing a salvo on a civilian packed suburb.
All of this ties rather bloodily in the supposed liberation of Mosul.  The operation is not going according to plan.  That, of course, presumes a coherent plan to begin with, with neat objectives, spread sheet directives, and boxes to tick.
The Iraqi forces, packed with US coalition participation in terms of coordinated air strikes, has realised that fighting in urban quarters, ballasted by air support, is a costly affair.  It is a discovery that had already been made centuries before, and such fighters, it would seem, are none the wiser.
For the insurgent, the civilian is not merely a shield but a gold asset rich in dividends.  Guerrillas, liked or otherwise by the local populace, blend in the landscape of rubble and charred ruins, finding protection in shattered remains and broken families.
The whole point, in a sense, is to obliterate the distinction between guerrilla and civilian, a fact that the intervening voices duly answer by inflicting heavy casualties – on civilians. Be it the ubiquitous car bomb or the air strike with delusionary famed weapons of precision, the distinction of being a combatant or civilian is irrelevant.  If you are in Mosul, you either flee, die or chance your luck. Forget the official line, and believe no one.
The casualty rate amongst civilians in the Mosul operation has spiked for the obvious reason that all sides in this conflict wish to capitalise on immediate gains with minimal concern.  As Iraqi forces make the bloody advance into a city of half a million, with some 2,000 remaining Islamic State forces, US-led strikes have flattened entire blocks.
The attack on a Mosul block led to as many as 200 civilian deaths, though the response from Iraqi authorities was a steadfast demurral: Islamic State, it was suggested, was behind it with one of their murderous car bombs.  Account and counter-account have followed.
According to Amnesty International, hundreds have died in their homes or places of refuge, advised by the Iraqi government to stay put as the cavalry charge in for the rescue.  “Survivors and eyewitnesses in East Mosul said they did not try to flee as the battle got underway because they received repeated instructions from Iraqi authorities to remain in their homes.”
In the newsrooms, civilian casualties are an embarrassment for the Coalition forces, though a confession to error made in good faith always goes down well for the home tax payers fronting the bills for such lethal adventures.  This is war, and war can be untidy and imperfect, despite immaculately filled spread-sheets and blueprints for victory.
Removing Islamic State forces from the city should remind the US personnel engaged about the disastrous operations run by the Coalition in Iraq from 2003.  Cluttered, dense, and unforgiving, warfare in the streets, where indiscriminate, opportunistically detonated car bombs meet air delivered weapons, can only mean more remorseless suffering.
The pity of war lacks sincerity when monopolised by those who claim the motivations of liberation.  Such positions start making combating sides look plain and similar: every warring outfit wants to know they are on the side of the angels when they massacre populations and put a city to the sword. They all ultimately did it for a “good” cause.
The only difference is the hypocrisy associated with those moralist warriors who still claim that God, the Responsibility to Protect, or some fantastic notion of shielding civilians before modern carnage is ever feasible.  In war, there is dull, inevitable, cruel death, and in the modern era, the civilian is a pawn to be idealised in terms of protection, and killed in terms of expediency.

Letting The Poor Steer The Development Agenda

Moin Qazi

The perception that the poor do not have skills or would not be able to survive on their own is a myth. My experience with development finance has demonstrated that we have to encourage strategies that ensure wider participation of poor in schemes aimed at solving their problems. It is the unleashing of their social and mental energies and, not hackneyed government programmes and tiring lip service of politicians, which will make India’s development ambition a reality. All that the pro-villages rhetoric does is to pay lip service to the people who still live there without electricity and running water.
During all these years of my association with the rural sector, I have come to know that development is fuller when put in people’s hands, especially the poor, who know best how to use the scarce ad precious resources they could be provided with for their uplift. The first generation leaders of Independent India believed that economic justice would be advanced by the lessons of cooperation where common efforts to achieve the common good will subsume all artificial differences of caste, community and religion. Increasingly, these dreams have been dashed against the shoals of politics, bureaucracy and disregard for the fundamental principle of cooperation. They are all part of a virus sweeping the country, a malaise called dishonesty. Much of what the leaders promise is empty rhetoric and much of the harvest that false promises could reap was owing to the gullible public who saw quicksilver in mirages.
Although there is so much discussion in public forums of involving the stakeholders for appropriate development of the society in which the poor live , poor people rarely get the opportunity to develop their own agenda and vision or set terms for the involvement of outsiders. The entire participatory paradigm illustrates that people are participating in plans and programs that we – outsiders – have designed. Not only is there little opportunity for them to articulate their ideas, there is also seldom an institutional space where their ingenuity and creativity in solving their own problems can be recognized, respected and rewarded
Today the most important need for a development worker posted in a rural area is the need to listen. The best advice one could ever give to new entrants in the field of development is to listen to what the people want instead of trying to assume to know what the problems and solutions are.
If the primary focus is really ending poverty, we must establish partnership between poor communities so that they learn from one another and share traditional, practical knowledge and skills. Importing expensive, unworkable ideas, equipment and consultants simply destroys the capacity of communities to help themselves. That model encourages colossal falsification of figures, the excessive hiring of private consultants and contractors, conflicts of interest and a massive patronage system.
To fresh entrants in this field of development work, I can only suggest that it is important living in a village rather than dropping by for the day, if one really wants to get full insight. I think the main reason why many of our programmes have gone awry is because development workers particularly the senior bosses never had the patience to understand the problems and needs of villagers. During their official visits, they move through villages as if they are passing through revolving doors, rarely interested in dropping into a villager’s house, afraid of catching infection if they are made to taste the villager’s hospitality. Remarks like, ‘ I am a farmer myself’, ‘ you can’t pull wool over my eyes’ and ‘I was born and brought up in a village’ ‘ I know rural problems better than anybody else’ are a sign of arrogance and will not go down well with the people with whom you want to work.
It is only through long and close contact with the poor themselves and through our work with them that we are able to gain a deeper understanding and a more balanced view. In this way our experience is not that of a typical non-governmental organization (NGO) many of which work from within the confines of the project enclave or are based in urban centres from where excursions are made out into the villages by jeep. Such brief or sporadic encounters are unlikely to give any great insights into the lives of the poorest. Sadly, many NGOs are far removed from the realities of poverty and often fail to reach those most in need. For me the most surprising thing has been the simple human-to-human connection that has let me overcome both language and culture barriers.
The truth of a village can come out only slowly, with time — time for trust to build between the villagers and outsiders, and time for the outsider to peel away all the layers to get at the truth.
In his reflections on fieldwork the doyen of Indian anthropologists, Professor M.N. Shrinivas, has talked of successful ethnography as having to pass through three stages. An anthropologist is ‘once-born’ when he initially goes to the fields, thrust from familiar surroundings into a world he has very little clue about. He is ‘twice –born’ when, on living for some time among his tribe, he is able to see things from their viewpoint. To those anthropologists ,fortunate’ enough to experience it ,this second birth is akin to a Buddhist urge of consciousness ,for which years of study or mere linguistic facility do not prepare you. All of a sudden, one is about to see everything from the native’s point of view –be it festivals, fertility rites or the fear of death.
Economic development and social change must begin from within even though the initial nudges may have to come from outside. Well-meaning people should have the open mindedness to listen to those who work in the field and live the day-to-day challenges. That respect opens many doors .Lasting change comes about so slowly that you may not notice it until people resist being taken care of—they need to be given a chance to fulfill their own potential. When we design solutions that recognize the poor as clients or customers and not as passive recipients of charity, we have a real chance to end poverty. Importing unworkable ideas, equipment and consultants destroys the capacity of communities to help themselves. The people who pioneered the world’s most successful development programmes recognized this potential and always sought to evoke it. These are the ones who enabled the poor to take the right step on the right ladder at the right time. The results have been miraculous.
When we design solutions that recognize the poor as clients or customers and not as passive recipients of charity, we have a real chance to end poverty. And I believe we can do that in our generation. This logic comes from the importance of empathy—not one that comes from a place of superiority, but one born from a profound humility.
Doing things locally may bring multiple development impacts. Providing autonomy to local governments in formulating and implementing local development plans allows the plans to reflect the aspirations of local communities. Fiscal decentralization can also empower local governments to collect their own revenues and depend less on central government grants. But if the local approach is to ensure human development for those left out, it will also require people’s participation and greater local administrative capacity.
As Verghese Kurien, the father of India’s Milk Revolution repeatedly emphasized: “India’s place in the sun would come from the partnership between wisdom of its rural people and skill of its professionals”

Prejudices Against Africans In India

Vidya Bhushan Rawat

A young boy was found dead in Noida. The family and the people alleged that it is the Africans who have drugged him so he got cardiac arrest and after that the crowd swell and become violent against them. Police as usual arrest some of the Nigerian students and found nothing incriminating against them so release them later but the people are dissatisfied. The shocking part of this violence is a rumour when the boy was missing his mother felt that these Negros must have eaten him up. Earlier too some dogs were missing from the area. Now, in an area which could not trace the likes of Mohinder Singh Pandher and his associate for what they had been doing for years, accused of kidnapping children and eating them up. They are in jail but we do not hear any sensitivity on the issue. It is very easy to make any stereotype against African. Police swung into action, found the boys dead body but still the people continue to protest. Now, they twist the story that the boy was drugged.
Yes, drugs are a big problems but are these problems created by the Africans here. Our children are too ‘naive’. Indians have not even learnt how to grow their children. They think except their children, everybody else is a crooked and here all those who do not look like them. A society which lives in false arrogance, where children are not taught that the world is diverse, that there are different languages, different colours of skins, diverse religions and regions, we will only grow in prejudices.
Though India remained a society with high prejudices against their own countrymen where caste, gender and religious prejudices are running high yet at the level of government as well as in the media there was a veil of decency to oppose it even if it in their heart they were not fully convinced. Political class was not that rampant to keep silent on such prejudiced violence as happening now. The state apparatus at the moment has kept mum now. External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj knows it well how difficult it has become for her Ministry to defend the indefensible
After Yogi’s ascendency to power in Uttar Pradesh there is a tendency growing up among the powerful communities to take law unto their hand as they feel they have now got power and can do anything and get away with it. Already Muslims in the state are feeling enormous pressure in the name of closing of ‘slaughterhouses’ in the name of legal verses illegal debate. The state government knows fully well as who owned them and need to clarify it. Any slaughterhouse can become illegal if the government does not give it permission. Similarly, issue of threatening the opponents. The language is becoming shriller and arrogant day by day.
The Noida incident is not isolated one and a sudden eruption of such feelings. These feeling will grow as we educate our children about our own ‘greatness’ and the masculine power of our civilisation. It is not that one should not respect ones values but there are certain values which are universal. Civilisations have grown when they have capacity to include various other ingredients that are brought by diverse ethnicities and other civilisation. No civilisation grow out of an isolation and without any amalgamation of various value systems. India’s strength was its diversity and strength to absorb but all this is under the attack. Nobody is better than us. If we appreciate others, it is ‘appeasement’. If we critique our own racial and caste based prejudices then we are ‘western liberal’ ignoring the wider fact that right from Buddha to Kabir to Ravidas, Ambedkar, Phule, Periyar, Rahul Sankrityayan, Vivekananda have spoken about the dirty of untouchability and caste discrimination in our society. Those who glorify our past have rarely done anything to do away with the caste discrimination.
Africans have been our friends and have historical ties with us. In their war against colonialism, they learnt a lot from us and vice versa. Even when we have caste discrimination and our biases our political leadership always stood with the rights of Africans but today it is under severe strain. The biases in our minds exists even those who live in East Africa, Uganda or Kenya. Africans in these countries have reported how they face prejudices from Indians.
The ideas which are being propagated and imposed upon Indian people are dangerous at the moment. The ideas of supremacy over others, of singularity, of so called oneness, which talks as if we are a homogeneous society rather than celebrating diversity of faiths, of regions, cultural values and races. It is becoming a society based on We and us which is not keen to accommodate ‘them’. The multiculturalism is a strength too but these days it has become the biggest whipping ground for the religious rights for whom every ailment of their society is because of ‘others’ who don’t follow their ‘faith” and ‘cultural value system”. Hence, you will find people who get suspicious of those who are non-vegetarian. There are people who look upon you as a criminal if you tell them that you eat meat or drink Vodka. If you are sitting late night, have a dancing group in which girls are partners, then immediately you are corrupt and the girls as ‘cheap’ and worst than ‘bigadail’.
We know well whether it is Africans or North Eastern regions of Indian friends, they face these prejudices. They are looked as all of them are druggists. As if all of them are potential ‘rapists’ and as if all of the girls who smile and go around with their friends are ‘prostitutes’. Such mindset need to go. India will stand to lose in the comity of nations if we do not educate our children and families look insidiously as what ails our society. Are African nationals in India responsible for crime happening here? Are they responsible for drugs or bad habits of our children? Are African girls responsible for brothels that are operating here from centuries?
We must think. We must not allow such farcical heroics to grow. It is time. If any African boy or girl are on the wrong side of the law, let it take its own course. The people have no right to decide on the street. You can not become a lynch mob and decide about it. International community is watching you and your behaviour pattern. It is time to grow. More than the people, it is the politicians who use people’s sentiments to grow in politics need to understand and behave as responsible spokesperson of the country. Indians face violence on such basis many places and we cry loud. Why do we engage in such things. Our administration and police need to be educated to handle such issues. At the top level, I would love to hear a Man ki Baat on the issue of untouchability, caste discrimination, racial and religious prejudices in our society. It remain the biggest challenge to India today whether we can rise above all these prejudices ?

Widespread damage after Cyclone Debbie batters north-east Australia

Oscar Grenfell 

Initial reports indicate widespread damage and destruction after large areas of north-east Queensland were struck by tropical Cyclone Debbie yesterday. At least one serious injury has been reported, after a wall collapsed on an elderly man in the town of Proserpine. Authorities have warned of the likelihood of further injuries, and possible fatalities, as more information comes to light.
The cyclone hit Queensland’s north-eastern coast at around 12 p.m. yesterday, and was designated as a category four storm with winds of up to 260 kilometres per hour. By early Wednesday morning, the storm had been downgraded to a tropical low, with heavy rain and strong winds moving inland and towards the state’s south-east.
As many as 68,000 residents of the Mackay, Whitsunday and Bowen regions were left without power overnight and around 400 schools and daycare centres are shut.
Authorities are set to survey a number of areas today, but already severe damage to houses and infrastructure has been reported in the worst affected areas. All roads to Airlie Beach, Bowen and Proserpine are closed, leaving the local residents stranded. Authorities reported today that they were seeking to reach up to 300 people on the Daydream Island holiday resort in the Whitsundays who have almost run out of water.
Photographs published online have shown houses with their roofs torn off, felled trees and overturned boats. Flying debris reportedly damaged many properties. Farms and agricultural businesses have also reported the destruction of equipment and crops.
Those who bore the brunt of the cyclone have described it as leaving destruction akin to a “war zone,” while others have spoken of terrifying ordeals during the storm.
Sue, a resident in Proserpine, spoke to ABC Tropical North radio last night. “The next-door neighbour's roof has been flying off for hours and it's smashed into our side windows—we've got three broken windows now so the rooms are totalled,” she said. She added, “I have lived up here all my life and this is the first time I've had damage like this.”
Gail Harvey, a resident of the Whitsunday region, told ABC the storm was, “Horrendous—in 30 years I've been through a lot of cyclones on Hamilton Island. One year we had five cyclones—one after the other—and in recent years we've had some big ones but this one is just staying around and not moving.”
Questions have already been raised over the preparations by government authorities for the cyclone.
Residents of Hamilton Island, a popular resort, have stated that despite being in the path of the storm, there was no attempt made to evacuate them or provide any assistance in the lead-up to the cyclone.
Lissa Morris, a resident on the island, told news.com.au yesterday that, “We would have evacuated but we didn’t get a chance. We’ve had literally no advice, everyone is literally stranded, no one can get on or off the island.”
In other areas, infrastructure for severe weather events has not kept pace with population growth. The area around Bowen, a town on the north-eastern coast, which was among the worst hit by the storm, has a population of 10,000, but its evacuation centre can only accommodate 800 people. The evacuation centre at nearby Proserpine, which has a population of over 3,000, has a similar capacity.
In the lead-up to the storm, Whitsunday Regional Council Mayor Andrew Wilcox told residents who could not leave Bowen to stay with friends and family in “high, dry places.” He said that the cyclone shelter was a “last resort.”
Many of the region’s houses do not have cyclone-proof features. Prior to the storm, State Emergency Service regional manager Daryl Camp said he had concerns for 5,500 homes in Burdekin, an area near Bowen, which had been built prior to 1980. “If it's still nails that hold the roof down, if the roof trusses aren't fixed to a cyclone standard, that's where you get a bit of issue,” Camp said.
Collinsville, a mining town south-west of Bowen was also unprepared for the storm, which struck as a category two cyclone on Tuesday night. There were no evacuation centres set up in the town, which has never experienced a storm of that magnitude, and there are reports of widespread damage to houses. As in previous disasters, the poor and working class will be worst affected.
Weather experts have noted that the scope of Cyclone Debbie’s damage may be typical of new cyclonic patterns. While the number of tropical cyclones hitting Queensland and Western Australia are thought to be at the lowest levels in up to 500 years, the storm events that do occur are increasingly severe. There are ongoing discussions among scientists as to whether the new patterns are attributable to human-induced climate change.
In an article on the Conversation, Jonathan Nott, a Professor of Physical Geography at James Cook University warned that current infrastructure and planning, based on a lull in cyclonic activity over the past four decades, may be inadequate for severe storms. Nott wrote that if projections of more severe cyclones are correct, “we are taking a big gamble with existing homes, roads and offices.”
Nott also raised questions over the commitment of the Queensland state Labor government, and local authorities, to further coastal developments, including lucrative commercial projects. In order to facilitate these projects, the government recently removed a safeguard on state planning policy to consider future sea level rises.
The subordination of public safety to immediate profit interests, and a lack of planning have exacerbated previous disasters. In 2011, Cyclone Yasi struck north-east Queensland, killing one person, demolishing 150 homes and rendering another 650 uninhabitable.
The cyclone revealed a chronic lack of preparation by state and federal government authorities, with many of the government’s evacuation centres not rated as cyclone proof. This was despite a pledge by the state Labor government, following the devastation wrought by Cyclone Larry in 2006, that well-equipped and tested evacuation centres would be built in all communities across north-east Queensland.
The Queensland government has stated that houses in some areas struck by Cyclone Debbie may be without power for a week. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, along with federal Labor leader Bill Shorten, issued cynical calls for the major insurance companies to compensate those hit by the storm, in a bid to defuse suspicions that as in previous disasters, they will do everything they can to avoid payments.
Significantly, the federal government’s response to the cyclone has centred on the deployment of 1,000 military personnel to affected areas, along with a naval vessel, HMAS Choules, an airforce craft and army and navy helicopters. Brigadier Christopher Field was appointed State Recovery Commander by Turnbull, who declared that he was a “distinguished military officer.”
Field was heavily involved in the army-led response to the 2011 Queensland floods. The military official who was in charge of that response menacingly warned against media reportage of community “divisiveness,” i.e., anger at authorities, claiming that it would hamper the “success” of the operation. As in 2011, the current mobilisation is aimed at intimidating critics of the government response, and normalising the ever-greater role of the military in civilian life.

China makes overtures amid strategic uncertainty in Australia

James Cogan

Chinese Premier Li Kegiang, along with a large number of officials and business figures, concluded a five-day state visit to Australia on Sunday and continued on to New Zealand. Li and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull held talks and attended a football game, while numerous other discussions took place. Publicly, emphasis was given to talks on expanding the already massive trade ties and growing investment between the two countries. Behind the scenes, however, there is little doubt that frank exchanges took place on Canberra’s stance toward the growing tensions between China, Australia’s largest trading partner, and the United States, its strategic ally.
Li’s visit pre-empted any trip to Australia by a senior representative of the newly formed Trump administration in Washington. Vice President Mike Pence has announced a visit next month, but Trump has given no indication as to when, or if, he will come to Canberra. On the Australian side, Malcolm Turnbull has indicated he will not travel to the US until at least May. Top level diplomacy has been left to Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, who visited the US in February to meet with Pence and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
The Chinese regime is acutely aware of the ever-more public debate in the Australian political establishment on how closely the country should align with the US. Barely a day passes without some criticism in the media or by foreign policy think tanks of the Trump administration’s destabilisation of world economic and political relations by its “America First” militarism and threats of protectionism and trade war. Former politicians and diplomats have even called for Canberra to extricate itself from its intimate involvement in the US “pivot to Asia” and military build-up in the region since 2011, which has included the expansion of US bases in Australia.
Prior to Li’s arrival, Julie Bishop signalled in a major foreign policy speech that the Turnbull government would not distance Australia from the US, calling instead for Washington to play an “even greater role” in Asia. China, she declared, was a “strategic competitor” of the US, challenging the “liberal rules-based order” that served Australian interests. She proceeded, however, to issue a veiled warning that damage to those interests by US protectionist measures, or any retreat by the US from its alliance guarantees, could result in a shift by not only Australia, but a number of US-aligned countries in the region.
Feng Zhang, an academic contributor to the Australian Strategic and Policy Institute, commented on March 28: “Chinese elites can’t help but wonder whether Australia is now a strategic prize up for grabs in the age of Trump.”
The Chinese regime framed Li’s diplomatic approach accordingly. Rather than taking a confrontational stance, he came instead bearing political and economic overtures.
Standing alongside Turnbull, Li declared China was committed to “global peace, regional stability and free trade.” For countries such as Australia, he continued, there was “no such issue as taking sides” between the US and China. As evidence, Beijing brought forward a review of Australian corporate access to key service sector markets in China such as finance, health care and aged care, under the terms of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement.
Li also announced that Australia had been granted the right to export chilled beef. Australia is the only country to have been given this trade concession, which is worth over $400 million to beef producers. Further concessions were extended to Australian-based online sellers of powdered-milk products, baby formula and vitamin supplements, also worth tens of millions of dollars in additional exports.
Crowning the Chinese economic overtures was an offer to integrate plans to develop road, rail and other infrastructure in northern Australia with the massive Chinese “One Belt One Road” scheme to construct land and maritime trading links across the Eurasian land mass. Such a linkage would conceivably enable projects in Australia to apply for funding from institutions such as the Export-Import Bank of China and the newly formed Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).
Turnbull matched Li’s sugary language, declaring that China was Australia’s “very good friend” and that “the idea that Australia has to choose between China and the United States is not correct.”
His government, however, turned down Chinese involvement in the development of northern Australia—the region closest geographically to Asia, particularly the key sea lanes between the Pacific and Indian Oceans, and the focus of American military interest in the Australian continent. In US strategic documents, northern Australia has been openly described as an American “sanctuary” in the event of a major war with China.
In 2011, an agreement to base several thousand US marines in the northern city of Darwin for six months of the year was signed between the Obama administration and the Gillard Labor Party government. At the same time, the so-called “Enhanced Air Cooperation” agreement was entered into, under which the US Air Force is now operating some of its most sophisticated combat aircraft from northern Australia. At present, an entire squadron of 12 F-22 Stealth fighters is based at Tindal air base to the south of Darwin. Large tracts of northern Australia are designated military training ranges and used by American bombers and jet fighters for live fire exercises.
The commander of US forces in the Pacific, Admiral Harry Harris, announced at the beginning of the year that he intends long-range B1 bombers to operate on a rotational basis from Australia, rather than Guam where they are currently based. US naval visits to Australian ports have increased exponentially over the past six years, and discussions are still underway on the feasibility of basing nuclear submarines or even an aircraft carrier battle group at the Indian Ocean port of Stirling, near Perth, Western Australia.
Chinese activity in northern Australia is viewed with intense suspicion and hostility both in Washington and by the vocal pro-US constituency in the Australian establishment. In 2015, the Turnbull government was fiercely condemned for not intervening to prevent the Northern Territory government granting a commercial contract to a Chinese company to operate docks at the port of Darwin. Subsequently, a bid by a Chinese company for a large farm in the north was rejected on national security grounds because it borders a military range, while two Chinese bids for Australian power companies have also been rejected.
An analyst recently warned that any attempt by an Australian government to try to lessen military cooperation with the US, or ignore its opposition to sensitive Chinese investment, would risk potentially devastating economic retaliation. The US is Australia’s largest source of foreign investment and second largest trading partner.
Yesterday, in the wake of Li’s visit, Julie Bishop began meeting with some 113 Australian ambassadors who were recalled to Australia for top-level discussions on the country’s foreign policy orientation. The framework of the talks was indicated in Bishop’s opening statement.
The US, she declared, “has a new president driving an economic nationalist agenda.” The world, as a result of Trump, was “less predictable, more unstable.” China’s growth posed both “challenges and opportunities.”
Bishop concluded: “It’s how we balance our relationships that will determine our success.”
The balancing act, however, is growing increasingly fraught and the claim of “not having to choose” increasingly hollow. In another snub to Beijing, the Labor Party and right-wing populists combined in the parliament yesterday to force the Turnbull government to renege on an agreement to enact an extradition treaty with China, with hypocritical rhetoric flowing from the Australian establishment over the regime’s human rights abuses.
At the same time, the Trump administration is continuing to aggravate tensions with Beijing, issuing threats of pre-emptive strikes on China’s ally, North Korea, to destroy its nuclear and long range missile programs. Any military action on the Korean Peninsula would immediately involve American bases and assets in Australia and almost certainly see US requests for the involvement of the Australian armed forces.