4 Apr 2017

Estonian Government Scholarships for International Students, Researchers and Academic Staff 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 1st May 2017
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Estonia

Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  • A scholarship is paid on condition that the scholarship recipient is studying full time and completes cumulatively at least 75% of the coursework required by the curriculum by the end of each academic year. The scholarship of degree study is not paid during the stay at academic leave or in exceeding the nominal duration of the studies.
  • The commission will favour applicants who have not been granted or given any other scholarships for the same period or for the same aim.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: 350 EUR per month. Additional costs such as tuition fee, health insurance and other costs will not be compensated.
Duration of Scholarship: The scholarship for degree study is paid for twelve calendar months each academic year during the nominal period of study, except the last academic year of the nominal period of study when the scholarship is paid for ten months.
How to Apply: The entrance to the institution of higher education is separate from the application for the scholarship. The decision to award scholarship for the applicant does not guarantee his/her admittance to the HEI. The applicant should submit the required documents to the HEI according to the entrance requirements of the institution of higher education. The decision on admittance to the institution of higher education should be adopted before the payment of scholarship.
The following documents shall be submitted for the scholarship for students (application period is from 1.04.2017 to 1.05.2017):
  • application form and motivation letter through online application system
  • confirmation of admission from the higher education institution in Estonia or confirmation of submission of required admission documents;
  • copy of passport or ID-card.
All documents should be in English or Estonian. Documents must be translated to any of these languages if the language of issuance is different. The foundation has the right to require the additional documents. Submitted documents will be not returned to the applicant. The applications which are not full complicated, drawn up as required, include false information or are submitted with a delay are not assessed.
Award Provider: Estonian Government

UN Human Rights Fellowship for People of African Descent 2017 – Switzerland

Application Deadline: 31st May 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible African Countries: Applicants of African Origin
To be taken at (country): Geneva, Switzerland
About the Award: The Fellowship Programme for People of African Descent provides the participants with an intensive learning opportunity to deepen their understanding of the United Nations human rights system, instruments and mechanisms, with a focus on issues of particular relevance to people of African descent. The Fellowship Programme will allow the participants to better contribute to the protection and promotion of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of people of African descent in their respective countries.
Offered Since: 2011
Selection Criteria: The selection of the fellows will reflect gender and regional balance. The human rights situation of People of African Descent in the respective countries will also be taken into consideration.
Eligibility
  • The candidate must be an individual of African descent living in the Diaspora. · The candidate must have a minimum of 4 years of work experience related to the rights of People of African Descent.
  • The candidate needs to have sufficient command of the English language to be able to participate fully in the programme.
  • The candidate has to submit a letter from an organization working on issues related to People of African Descent or minority rights certifying their status.
  • The candidates must be available to attend the full duration of the programme. The selected fellows will be expected to participate in different activities and to strictly follow the programme.
Number of Scholarships:  Not Specified
Value of Scholarship: Each fellow is entitled to a return ticket (economy class) from the country of residence to Geneva, basic health insurance, and a stipend to cover modest accommodation and other living expenses for the duration of the Programme.
Duration of Scholarship: In the framework of the Programme of Activities for the Implementation of the International Decade for People of African Descent, this year the Fellowship will be held from 13 November to 1 December 2017 in Geneva, Switzerland.
How to Apply
Visit scholarship webpage for details

Eira Davies Undergraduate and Postgraduate Scholarship for African Women in Sciences 2017

Application Deadline: 18th June, 2017
Offered annually? No
Eligible Countries: Female students from developing Countries. See countries below
To be taken at (country): Swansea University,  United Kingdom
Eligible Field of Study: Courses in the Human and Health Sciences
About the Award: The Eira Francis Davies Scholarship, which shall be awarded from time to time by the Senate of Swansea University on the basis of academic merit and/or financial need and which shall contribute to tuition fees, shall be tenable for such period as determined by the Senate and shall be subject to satisfactory academic progress and to such other terms and conditions as the University shall stipulate. It is a condition of the award of the Eira Francis Davies Scholarship that the student agrees to return to her country for work or study upon completion of degree studies at Swansea University.
Type: Undergraduate and Postgraduate Degrees
Eligibility: Female students ordinarily resident in a developing country* who are admitted to pursue an undergraduate or a Taught Master’s postgraduate course at Swansea University’s College of Human & Health Science shall be eligible to apply for the Eira Francis Davies Scholarship.
  • For undergraduate courses, applicants are expected to achieve 3 A and/or B grades at A-Level or equivalent (excluding General Studies) and 5 A and/or B grades at GCSE level or equivalent. For Postgraduate Taught courses, applicants should have a minimum of a 2:1 Bachelors degree (or equivalent). In the case of all applicants, their English language ability must meet any stipulated condition of offer and UKBA requirements.
  • Candidates must be new, full-time, degree seeking, non-EU applicants
  • Candidates must have completed an application to study and accepted the offer of a place at Swansea University with the College of Human and Health Sciences
  • Candidates must show strong academic ability and financial need
  • Candidates should not be eligible for other financial support from Swansea University e.g. tuition fee reductions through collaborative links or bursaries Please note that students progressing from ICWS are not eligible to apply for an International Scholarship
Eligible Countries: Afghanistan, Gambia, The Myanmar, Bangladesh, Guinea, Nepal, BeninGuinea-BissauNigerBurkina Faso, Haiti, RwandaBurundiKenyaSierra Leone, Cambodia, Korea, Dem Rep., SomaliaCentral African Republic, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, ChadLiberiaTanzania, Comoros, MadagascarTogoCongo, Dem. RepMalawiUgandaEritreaMaliZimbabweEthiopiaMozambique, Angola, India, Sao Tome and Principe, Armenia, Iraq, Senegal, Belize, Kiribati, Solomon Islands, Bhutan, Kosovo, Sri Lanka, Bolivia, Lao PDR, SudanCameroonLesothoSwazilandCape Verde, Marshall Islands, Syrian Arab Republic, Congo, Rep., Mauritania, Timor-Leste, Ivory Coast, Micronesia, Fed. Sts. Tonga, Djibouti, Moldova, Turkmenistan, Egypt, Arab Rep., Mongolia, Tuvalu, El Salvador, Morocco, Ukraine, Fiji Nicaragua, Uzbekistan, Georgia, Nigeria, Vanuatu, Ghana, Pakistan, Vietnam, Guatemala, Papua New Guinea, West Bank and Gaza, Guyana, Paraguay, Yemen, Rep., Honduras, Philippines, Zambia, Indonesia and Samoa
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: The Eira Francis Davies Scholarship is a full tuition fee scholarship, and will be awarded to students demonstrating academic excellence and evidence of financial need
Duration of Scholarship: Duration of course or degree
How to Apply: Apply here 
Award Provider: Swansea University
Important Notes: Candidates should endeavour to read the full Eira Davies Terms and Conditions before applying.

Open Society Moving Walls 24 Exhibition & Grant for Photographers Worldwide 2017

Application Deadline: 14th April 2017
Eligible Countries: All
About the Award: The Open Society Documentary Photography Project is seeking photo-based artists whose goal is to resist, question, and/or affirm, not merely to illustrate or document negative impacts as a neutral observer.
We invite proposals about work that engages with topics of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation/expression, religion, nationality, and immigration status from a variety of perspectives. We encourage applicants to interpret these themes broadly.
We welcome a wide range of photo- and image-based approaches, including documentary photography, conceptual documentary, archival images, curated or aggregated projects, social practice, video art, interactive media, and projects that use photography and/or associated metadata as the basis for information art. Projects may be contemporary, or include historical material.
Type: Grants
Eligibility: 
  • We are seeking photographers and artists who bring expertise and new insight to an issue; who demonstrate a high level of artistic ability or excellence; and who have the skills, track record, and capacity to realize the proposed grant project.
  • Applicants must demonstrate an ongoing commitment to visual activism or resistance through their past and ongoing work, and must have worked on at least 2 projects related to these themes.
  • Projects considered for exhibition may be part of a larger, ongoing body of work, but the Moving Walls exhibit will be curated from work that already exists (funds will not be provided to shoot new work specifically for the exhibition).
  • Projects considered for the grant may be part of a larger, ongoing body of work, or may be a new body of work related to the broader themes of the exhibit.
Ineligibility:
Projects that include lobbying activities will not be funded. Please carefully review the tax law lobbying rules available in the Download Files section before submitting an application.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value and Duration of Grants: Selected projects will be exhibited in the next installment of our ongoing Moving Walls exhibition series, opening in October 2017 at the Open Society Foundations–New York. Selected artists will also receive a grant of $20,000–$30,000 to support ongoing or future work on these themes.
How to Apply: Applications must be submitted through our online application form by Friday, April 14, 2017, 5:00 p.m. EST. For a detailed list of questions in the submission form, see pages 8-10.
Award Provider: Open Society Foundation

Audio Engineering Society (AES) Graduate Scholarships for Talented Students 2017

Application Deadline: 15th May 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: Applications are accepted from students worldwide.
About the Award: Since its establishment in 1984, the Foundation has awarded grants for graduate studies to hundreds of exceptional applicants, many of whom have gone on to prominent and successful careers in the profession. Applications are accepted from students worldwide.
Type: Training/Masters
Eligibility: All applicants are required to have met these criteria:
  • The successful completion of an undergraduate degree program (typically four years) at a recognized college or university
  • A demonstrated commitment to audio engineering (or a related field) as a career choice
  • Acceptance or a pending application for graduate studies leading to a masters or higher degree, or an internationally recognized equivalent
  • Be a member in good standing of the Audio Engineering Society (any membership grade qualifies)
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: one-time renewal
Duration of Scholarship: Awards are made annually, in August, and a recipient may apply for one-time renewal after the successful completion of at least one year of graduate studies. Payment will be sent directly to the graduate school on behalf of the student’s tuition account.
How to Apply: Application forms may be downloaded by clicking here
It is important to go through the scholarship webpage for Application instructions before applying
Award Provider: Audio Engineering Society

Israel Steps up Dirty Tricks Against Boycott Leaders

Jonathan Cook

Nazareth.
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed cohorts of Israel loyalists in the United States by video link last week at the annual conference of AIPAC, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee.
They should, he said, follow his government’s example and defend Israel on the “moral battlefield” against the growing threat of the international boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement. In Netanyahu’s simple-minded language, support for Palestinian rights, and opposition to the settlements, is equivalent to “delegitimisation” of Israel.
The current obsession with BDS reflects a changing political environment for Israel.
According to an investigation by the Haaretz newspaper last month, Israeli agents subverted the human rights community in the 1970s and 1980s. Their job was to launder Israel’s image abroad. Yoram Dinstein, a professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, led the local chapter of Amnesty International, the world’s most influential rights organisation of the time, running it effectively as a wing of Israel’s foreign ministry.
Dinstein’s interference allowed Israel to falsely characterise the occupation as benevolent while presenting the Palestinians’ liberation struggle as terrorism. The reality of Israel’s oppression of Palestinians rarely reached outsiders.
Israel’s task is harder five decades on. The human rights community is more independent, while social media and mobile phone cameras have allowed Palestinians and their supporters to bypass the gatekeepers.
In the past few days, videos have shown an Israeli policeman savagely beating a Palestinian lorry driver, and soldiers taking hostage a terrified eight-year-old after he crossed their path while searching for a toy.
If concealment at source is no longer so easy, the battle must be taken to those who disseminate this damning information. The urgency has grown as artists refuse to visit, universities sever ties, churches pull their investments and companies back out of deals.
Israel is already sealing itself off from outside scrutiny as best it can. Last month it passed a law denying entry into Israel or the occupied territories to those who support BDS or “delegitimise” Israel.
But domestic critics have proved trickier. The Israel government has chipped away at the human rights community’s financial base. Media regulation has intensified. And the culture ministry is cracking down on film productions that criticise the occupation or government policy.
But the local boycott movement is feeling the brunt of the assault. Activists already risk punitive damages if they call for a boycott of the settlements. Transport minister Yisrael Katz stepped up the threats last year, warning BDS leaders that they faced “civil targeted assassination”. What did he mean?
Omar Barghouti, the movement’s Palestinian figurehead, was arrested last month, accused of tax evasion. He is already under a travel ban, preventing him from receiving an international peace award this month. And Israeli officials want to strip him of his not-so “permanent” residency.
At the same time, a leading Israeli rights activist, Jeff Halper, founder of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, was detained by police on suspicion of promoting BDS while leading activists on a tour of an illegal settlement.
These are the first signs of the repression to come. The police minister, Gilad Erdan, has announced plans for a database of Israelis who support BDS, to mirror existing spying operations on BDS activists overseas. The information will help a “dirty tricks” unit whose job is to tarnish their reputations.
Erdan also wants a blacklist of companies and organisations that support boycotts. A law passed in February already shames the few companies prepared to deny services to the settlements, forcing them publicly to “out” themselves.
Why is Israel so fearful? Officials say the immediate danger is Europe’s labelling of settlement products, the first step on a slippery slope they fear could lead to Israel being called an apartheid state. That would shift the debate from popular boycotts and divestment by civil society groups to pressure for action by governments – or sanctions.
The inexorable trend was illustrated last month when a United Nations commission found Israel guilty of breaching the international convention on the crime of apartheid. Washington forced the UN secretary-general to repudiate the report, but the comparison is not going away.
Israel supporters in the United States have taken Netanyahu’s message to heart. Last week they unveiled an online “boycotters map”, identifying academics who support BDS – both to prevent them entering Israel and presumably to damage their careers.
For the moment, the Israeli-engineered backlash is working. Western governments are characterising support for a boycott, even of the settlements, as anti-Semitic – driven by hatred of Jews rather than opposition to Israel’s oppression of Palestinians. Anti-BDS legislation has passed in France, Britain, Switzerland, Canada and the US.
This is precisely how Netanyahu wants to shape the “moral battlefield”. A reign of terror against free speech and political activism abroad and at home, leaving Israel free to crush the Palestinians.
On paper, it may sound workable. But Israel will soon have to accept that the apartheid genie is out of the bottle – and it cannot be put back.

The Real Russiagate

Paul Craig Roberts & Michael Hudson

Mike Whitney has written an excellent expose of the “Russiagate” cover story for Obama’s political use of national security to help his party oppose Republicans. Covert surveillance of politicians on Obama’s Nixon-like “Enemies List” has been going on for many years, but is only now being unmasked as a result of the failure of its cover story (“We weren’t spying on enemies; only on Russians to protect America”).
Democratic-leaking mass media have passed on the cover story authored by former Obama-administration officials led by CIA director John Brennan, FBI director James Comey, the DNC, and Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff. The loose ends in this cover-up have now been so widely exposed as hearsay and political that only 13% of Republicans believe the fact-free story – but, according to a poll, 67% of Democrats.
Whitney reports that Comey began the investigation in July 2016. As of last Friday (March 31, 2017) not a scrap of evidence has turned up.  This did not deter Comey from telling Congress that Putin “hated Secretary Clinton so much that the flip side of that coin was that he had a clear preference for the person running against the person he hated so much.” So the Russians allegedly “engaged in a multifaceted campaign to undermine our democracy.”
Comey based this conclusion on what has become a hilarious bit of gullibility. The Russians, he said “were unusually loud in their intervention. It’s almost as if they didn’t care that we knew, that they wanted us to see what they were doing.”
Alternatively, someone wanted investigators to infer that the Russians were doing the hacking. They were careful to insert the signature of GPU-NKVD founder Felix Dzerzhinsky for anyone to find. As Wikeleaks Vault 7 releases prove, the CIA can hack computers and leave anyone else’s signature. Due to poor security, the CIA’s cybertechnology ended up in the Internet domain.
“They’ll be back. They’ll be back, in 2020. They may be back in 2018,” warned Mr. Comey. But who is the “they”? “They” seem to be “us,” or at least what numerous former national security officials have suggested: either the NSC, CIA or its “Five Eyes” partner, British MI6.
Wall Street Journal editorialist Kimberley A. Strassel poses the real question: Why hasn’t the Trump administration had the Secret Service arrest Comey, Brennan, Schiff, the DNC and Hillary for trying to overthrow the President of the United States?  “Mr. Nunes has said he has seen proof that the Obama White House surveilled the incoming administration—on subjects that had nothing to do with Russia—and that it further unmasked (identified by name) transition officials. This goes far beyond a mere scandal. It’s a potential crime.”
What we are watching is turning out to be traces of a plot against a government elected by the American people. Attempts by House national security committee Chairman Devin Nunes have been countered with demands by his potential victims to recuse himself so as to stop his exposé of how “Team Obama was spying broadly on the incoming administration.”
It seems that this has been going on for many years now. Former Rep. Dennis Kucinich has dropped a bombshell about what appears to be his own illegal surveillance under Obama’s NSC.
“When the president raised the question of wiretapping on his phones in Trump Tower, he was challenged to prove that such a thing could happen. It happened to me.”
Here’s what happened, which was revealed two years after he left office in 2013 when the Democrats were overjoyed to see Ohio Republicans redraw the election district lines to get rid of his candidacy. The Washington Times asked him to authenticate a secret recording of a cell phone call “from Saif el-Islam Qaddafi, a high-ranking official in Libya’s government and a son of the country’s ruler, Moammar Qaddafi.”
Before taking the call, Rep. Kucinich “checked with the House’s general counsel to ensure that such a discussion by a member of Congress with a foreign power was permitted by law.”
“I was assured that under the Constitution a lawmaker had a fundamental duty to ask questions and gather information—activity expressly protected by the Article I clauses covering separation of powers and congressional speech and debate.”
Given the quality of the recordings was excellent on both ends of the call, Kucinich concluded that “the tape was made by an American intelligence agency and then leaked to the Times for political reasons. If so, this episode represented a gross violation of the separation of powers.”
His repeated Freedom of Information Act requests made in 2012 before leaving office have been stonewalled by the intelligence agencies for five years.
We are now in a position to see the real story behind “Russiagate.” It’s not about Russia, except incidentally. The Obama regime abused the government’s surveillance powers and spied on Donald Trump and other Republicans in order to build a dossier for the DNC to leak to the press in an attempt to slander or compromise Trump and throw the election to Hillary.
They’ve been caught, but we can now see that they took steps to protect themselves against this. They prepared a cover story. They pretend they were not spying on Trump, but on Russians – which only by fortuitous happenchance turned up incriminating smoke against Trump.
This cover story was buttressed by the fake news story prepared by former MI6 freelancer Christopher Steele. As Whitney reports, Steele “was hired as an opposition researcher last June to dig up derogatory information on Donald Trump.”  Unvetted and unverified information paid for by so-called informants “somehow” found its way into U.S. intelligence agency reports. These reports were then leaked to Democrat-friendly media.
This is where the crime lies. Obama regime and DNC were using these agencies for domestic political use, KGB style.
The Obama/Clinton cover story is now falling to pieces. That explains the desperation in the attack byAdam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, on Committee Chairman Devin Nunes to stop the exposure. Russiagate is not a Trump/Putin collusion but a domestic spy job carried out by Democrats.
Law requires Trump to arrest those responsible and to put them on trial for treason and conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States. If Trump fears to prosecute the Obama operatives within the Deep State, they will try all the harder to attack him to the point of forcing his removal, or at least discrediting him and his fellow Republicans to pave the way for the 2018 elections.

Pig Peril: the Real Threat to America!

TIM BEAL

You may have seen the scary story in The Hill by James Woolsey and Peter Pry, How North Korea could kill 90 percent of Americans
Frightening eh?  Especially the bit about  ‘Why do the press and public officials ignore or under-report these facts?’  Note that Woolsey is a former Director of the CIA, the Central Intelligence Agency. Intelligence, as in really smart and CIA, as in fiendishly devious. Or perhaps not smart, but certainly devious.
Devious?  Yeah, because they are not telling us the real story.
The clever folks at MSN put their fingers on it. MSN, as in Microsoft, as in Vista, as in Windows 7, as in really smart. Anyway, they highlighted the danger:
…which reminded Americans that North Korea could in theory use a satellite weapon to send an electromagnetic pulse over the United States, triggering widespread blackouts and ultimately, societal collapse.
OK, think about that ‘in theory’ and think of pig.
Why pig?
Well there are hundreds of millions of pigs. A lot of them in Russia. None in Israel or Saudi Arabia. What does that tell us?  You know people by the friends they keep. Or in this case animals.
OK, so the North Koreans don’t like us. There are lots of maladjusted people in the world like them. OK, so we killed 2 million, 3 million of them in the 1950s, but gooks, who’s counting? The Germans, the Japanese, the Vietnamese, they got over our killing them and moved on, so if the Koreans can’t do that it says something about them, right? OK, then there’s our sanctions causing malnutrition in their children. So they grow up stunted, if they grow up, but is that the end of the world? Means they can live in smaller houses and save money.
But pigs. Now that’s where real hatred lies. Think bacon, think ham, think pork crackling – now that gets me hungry. Anyway, pigs don’t like us. Pigs detest us.  Pigs hate us. Perhaps they’re envious of our freedom and democracy, or perhaps they just don’t like being slaughtered and eaten, who knows?
Now let’s go back to the folks at MSN, and instead of being side-tracked by this nonsense about North Koreans, think of the real enemy.
Woolsey and Fry, and MSN, tell us that, in theory, the North Koreans could kill 90% of us.
They’re right, but they’re pointing in the wrong direction
In theory, if they mastered the technology, pigs could fly.
And if they could fly, who would they attack?
Us, of course
And the North Koreans?  Only 25 million of them and we know where they live. And we have thousands of times more missiles and nuclear weapons than they could possibly have. And aircraft carriers, and B-52s, and B-1s, and F-22s and F-35s – after all those billions they must be useful for something. And all those bases in South Korea and Japan.
North Korea is not a problem, but pigs are a different matter. Sly, intelligent, tasty (sorry, slip of the tongue), and cunning. Oh, so cunning.
So why do the press and public officials ignore this clear and present danger? Are they in the pay of Putin (and how many pigs does he own?).
And it’s not merely a matter of foreign pigs. There are millions and millions of pigs here in the US. How many of them are Russian agents? Or Chinese?  If you’ve ever been to a Chinese restaurant you’ll realize that the Chinese have a love affair with pigs. And probably that love is reciprocated and many of what we fondly think of as our American pigs are really controlled from Beijing
So pigs here in America and pigs around the world pose an existential threat to our national security, our freedoms, our values, all that we hold dear.
As soon as they master the technology, which in theory they can
And when pigs can fly, we will face a frightening danger.
Why do our media and our public officials ignore it?  Is this because the highest in the land are secret porcinists?  Have you wondered why Barack Obama, born to a Muslim father became a Christian? Is that suspicious or is that suspicious? Was it to do with his love of pig? And have you seen a photograph of Donald Trump recently?
Wake up America, the pig peril is nigh!

The New South African Revolution

P R Dullay

South Africa is poised on a knife edge. Anything can happen. Last week Pravin Gordhan the Minister of Finance and former head of the S African Revenue Service, plus his deputy were recalled from London in the midst of a promotional roadshow for potential investors. Upon their return home, each was fired by the very president who appointed them. You will recall that a short while back President Zuma dismissed the then incorruptable finance minister, Nene and replaced him with a compliable Van Royen. The world markets reacted predictably and the S African currency began to slide furiously. A suddenly frightened Zuma was persuaded to appoint Gordhan, who is a seasoned economist. All of this happened within a week! A semblance of stability returned to the economy. The president was set back in his plans to capture the key ministry, but that did not signal normality. He had other plans up his sleeve.
Above all of this was the manipulative hand of a former family of Indian nationals, namely the Guptas, who recently obtained S African citizenship. This financially powerful and influential family saw the ease with which corruption was becoming the norm and decided to move in very decisively. From their luxurious Saxonwold mansion in Johannesburg they wanted not just access to lucrative tenders, but direct influence on the president and the appointing of various ministers who could be compromised. They succeeded, perhaps beyond their own dreams. The president and various ministers as well as potential corruptible appointees were regulars at Saxonwold and some were offered massive bribes, ostensibly, to fix matters. This insidious development met with outrage across the land. The president and his surrogates were untouched. The Guptas beat a well timed retreat to Dubai, from where their manipulation continues. Even the explosive report of the Public Protector on ‘state capture’ by the Guptas was smothered and the president bided his time. Like S Africas famed snake, the Black Mamba, he would strike with deadly force when it was time to do so.
Coincidentally, two matters came to a head almost at the same time last week, namely the death of a much loved struggle veteran and fellow prisoner with Mandela on Robben Island, Ahmed Kathrada, and the reshuffling of the cabinet to get Gordhan out of the way. Gordhan defiantly refused to step down and faced the wrath of a president who would not be thwarted. Gordhan stood between him and his fervent wish to get the funding of one trillion Rand to secure the purchase of between 6-8 nuclear power plants from Russia’s Rosatom. This represents the single largest expenditure in the history of the country and has the real potential to bankrupt S Africa. It is important to remember that this amount is equivalent to almost the entire GDP of the country. When seen in the face of the suppression of the government’s own electricity supply commission endorsing the development of S Africa’s massive potential in renewable energy sources, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the release of such vast sums will facilitate massive corruption, on a scale hitherto unknown. It has already begun. There is no credible supporter for Zuma’s nuclear plans. There are hosts of reports and findings endorsing the harnessing of renewable energy, with which S Africa is generously endowed and will, moreover, be safe and create thousands of jobs.
Perhaps this president did not figure out the rage that his actions have spurred. The family of the late Kathrada pointedly asked the president to stay away from his funeral arrangements. Kathrada’s widow, lashed out at the betrayal of Zuma of the proud traditions of the ANC and the people of S Africa. Bishop Desmond Tutu, other faith based leaders, civil sociey organisations, politicians, even within the ANC have condemned and backed away from his actions. In the coming week a range of opposition political parties and more, importantly, civil society organisations have called for a complete stay away and acts of civil disobedience.
A very slippery and slithering president is being cornered. His cunning manoeuvres and dodging the more than 800 charges against him are legendary, in as much as his raids on the public purse. It was not possible to accomplished this on his own and so he packed the government with those who would do his bidding, and of course, enrich themselves in the process, as a part of the deal. All the parastatals and key ministries were headed by those chosen and appointed as ‘pliable’ and partial to the wishes of the president. Their general lack of competence was a plus in their pliability. The media and the Office of the Public Protector exposed on a regular basis the raiding of the parastatals
The chances for chaos in Nelson Mandela’s homeland is great but so is the opportunity of getting a shot at the country re-inventing itself, in other words a second revolution, perhaps as great as the one that ended Apartheid and ushered in democracy. Few doubt today that the transition was seriously flawed. The compromises made in 1994 caused many to say that Mandela and the ANC sold out the struggle for real emancipation and settled for A World Bank/IMF brokered deal that was not in the interest of the people.
That Mandela’s government agreed to take over repayment of the money borrowed by the oppressors during the worst years of Apartheid repression was perhaps the first outrage. This was quickly followed by government silencing calls for the payment of reparations for the exploitation of Western multinational companies operating under Apartheid. The governments much vaunted Reconstruction and Development Programme of social reconstruction, was, at the insistence of the international banks, placed on the back burner and snuffed out. Little was done to address white corporate control of the economy. The ownership of the land remained much the same as under Apartheid. Academia remained unchanged and the training and development needs of an emerging economy (as skewered as it was) were ignored. Similarly, little was done to address the corrosive legacies of racism, slavery, indenture, sexism and colonialism. A new democratic order emerged that was a band-aid hotchpotch of neo-liberalism. The ANC’s Freedom Charter of basic rights was quietly ignored and remains unfulfilled. The accommodation of a few persons of colour into the white controlled economy and the creation of a black elite is transparently provocative. The people will not accept the continuation of this order.
This is the reason that I believe that S Africa is lucky to get a second shot at revolutionary development. It has all the mistakes to learn from and develop a powerful civil society that will direct the emergence of a true peoples’ government.

South Sudan “Rebels” And The CIA; Show Me The Money!

Thomas C. Mountain

For going on 3 years now a “rebel army” of some 20,000 South Sudanese soldiers have been fighting to overthrow the Salva Kiir government without any visible means of support. The government has oil revenues and aid funds but the “rebels” (and their propaganda arm in the west) have not been asked by anyone in the international media to “show me the money”.
Why? Maybe the recent kidnapping of Chinese oil company workers as a part of the “rebels” demand that China abandon its only oil field in Africa in Sudan. which can best be described as a blow struck on behalf of the “US National Interest”, for the USA is the ONLY party that benefits by the South Sudanese civil war.
Getting China out of African energy is why the CIA is picking up the tab for this most savage series of tribal based ethnic cleansing and massacres, to the tune of over $300 million and counting. Where else could this kind of off the books cash be coming from?
Do the math, 20,000 under arms at salaries starting at $300 a month and then add food, supplies, fuel, ammunition etc and you get a monthly nut of close to $10 million, over a $100 million a year and this for years now.
Show me the money! is the golden rule and why isn’t anyone asking this question when it comes to the South Sudan civil war? Who else could it be but the CIA that these “rebels” are getting their blood money from?

Trump threatens China with war on North Korea

Peter Symonds

Ahead of his meeting this week with Chinese President Xi Jinping, President Trump issued a blunt, menacing warning to Beijing to force North Korea to abandon its nuclear and missile programs … or else. Speaking to the Financial Times, he declared: “If China is not going to solve North Korea, we will. That is all that I am telling you.”
Trump outlined the ultimatum that he intends to deliver to Xi: “China has great influence over North Korea. And China will either decide to help us with North Korea, or they won’t. And if they do that will be very good for China, and if they don’t it won’t be good for anyone.”
Trump’s threats have only one meaning: if the Chinese government is not prepared to economically cripple or oust the Pyongyang regime, the US is prepared to use every means at its disposal, including its massive military might, against North Korea. As US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson emphasised during his trip to Asia last month, all options, including war with North Korea, are on the table.
Whatever measures the US might initially take, Trump made absolutely clear that he was prepared to attack North Korea and could do so with no notice. “I am not the United States of the past where we tell you where we are going to hit in the Middle East,” he told the newspaper. “Where they say … ‘We will be attacking Mosul in four months.’ … Why are they talking? There is no reason to talk.”
Behind closed doors, the Trump administration has been preparing for a war with North Korea that will not only be catastrophic for the Korean people on the divided peninsula but could drag in other major powers, including China, Russia and Japan.
The White House has just completed a review of US policy towards North Korea ahead of Xi’s meeting with Trump. While the options reportedly include heavy sanctions not only against North Korea but also Chinese firms doing business with Pyongyang, the Trump administration would not stop there.
During his recent trip, Tillerson declared that the Obama administration’s policy of incrementally increased sanctions—dubbed “strategic patience”—had failed. He also ruled out any immediate negotiations with Pyongyang. All of the remaining options—cyber warfare, provocations and covert operations to destabilise the North Korean regime and military action of various forms—threaten to rapidly plunge the region into war.
The Financial Times asked Trump: “Do you think you can solve it [North Korea] without China’s help?” His utter recklessness is summed up in his one word reply: “Totally.” Asked the same question again, he responded: “I don’t have to say any more. Totally.”
The incalculable consequences of war on the Korean Peninsula were summed up by Obama’s defence secretary, Ashton Carter, who has long been a supporter of military strikes on North Korea. Speaking to ABC News on Sunday, Carter declared that he was not optimistic about pressuring China to take action against North Korea.
Carter insisted that the military option had to remain on the table then, with callous indifference to the human suffering involved, sketched what would happen in the wake of a US pre-emptive strike on North Korea. “It is quite possible that they [Pyongyang] would … launch an attempted invasion of South Korea. As I said, I’m confident of the outcome of that war, which would be the defeat of North Korea.
“But I need to caution you. This is a war that would have an intensity of violence associated with it that we haven’t seen since the last Korean War. Seoul is right there on the borders of the DMZ [border with North Korea], so even though the outcome is certain, it is a very destructive war,” Carter declared.
Carter knows of what he speaks. As assistant defence secretary in the Clinton administration, he was deeply involved in planning for the war with North Korea in 1994 that was called off at the last minute when the Pentagon conservatively estimated the likely outcome—300,000 to 500,000 South Korean and American military casualties, not counting the death toll in North Korea and civilian dead and injured.
The death toll in the Korean War between 1950 and 1953 ran into the millions. Casualties in a war today in which North Korea as well as the US have nuclear weapons and could use nuclear weapons would be far higher. US Defence Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis has already warned that any attempt by Pyongyang to use its nuclear weapons would be met with an “effective and overwhelming response”—that is, nuclear annihilation.
The Korean War was the only time that China and the United States directly fought a war. The strategic position of the Korean Peninsula in North East Asia has made it a focus for invasions and wars for more than a century—involving not only the United States and China, but also Japan and Russia. The danger is that a new war would rapidly drag in other military powers, including those armed with nuclear weapons.
The danger of world war arises not simply as a result of the erratic and reckless behaviour of Trump. Rather, his irrationality is a product of the profound crisis of American and global capitalism and the determination of the US ruling class for whom he speaks to exploit its current military dominance to arrest its historic decline—whatever the outcome. A quarter century of military provocations and invasions in the Middle East and Central Asia are now coalescing into a confrontation with major US rivals—above all, China and Russia.
The reaction of the North Korean regime to the growing threat of war is utterly reactionary. Its missile and nuclear tests play directly into Washington’s hands by providing a pretext for war. Moreover, Pyongyang’s nationalist bombast and bloodcurdling threats against the US, Japan and South Korea only heighten the danger of war and sow divisions in the international working class.
Unlike the criminal US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 or the more recent wars in the Middle East, the countdown to war against North Korea is not being made public. Nevertheless it is proceeding with a relentless logic. Workers around the globe cannot afford to wake up one morning to find that the US has bombed North Korea and the world stands on the brink of a nuclear war.
The only means for halting the drive to war is to put an end to its source—the bankrupt profit system and its division of the world into rival nation states—through the building of a unified anti-war movement of the working class based on socialist internationalism.

Maldives opposition intensifies campaign to destabilise government

Rohantha De Silva 

An impeachment motion by the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) against Abdulla Maseeh Mohamed, the parliamentary speaker, failed last week following a violent confrontation. The motion was part of ongoing moves to oust President Abdulla Yameen and his government by Mohammed Nasheed, the pro-US MDP leader and former president.
While the MDP only has 26 MPs in the 85-member parliament, it hoped several parliamentarians from the ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) which supports Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, would break ranks and vote with the opposition. Gayoom, a long-time leader of the PPM and president of the Maldives from 1978-2008, has opposed Yameen—his half-brother—after being marginalised in the party.
MDP lawmakers began a protest in parliament, claiming that the ruling coalition had changed the usual electronic voting system, in order to conceal how MPs voted on the impeachment motion. Military officers were called in by the speaker to remove 13 protesting MPs from the parliament. The opposition claimed that MPs were manhandled and dragged from the chamber.
The impeachment motion was voted down by 48 MPs. The public, media, and non-government organisations were barred from parliament house during the vote.
While increasingly isolated, President Yameen is attempting to muzzle the opposition and block its attempts to oust the president. Nasheed told the Economic Times that there are currently 1,700 political activists, either under threat, on trial or in jail. Nasheed and his party, however, have no concern for the democratic rights of the Maldivian people.
The infighting between the opposition and President Yameen is bound up with US and Indian geo-political manoeuvres against China. The Maldives, an archipelago of 1,192 islands with a population of just 400,000, is strategically located astride major sea lanes across the Indian Ocean.
Following the failure of the impeachment motion, Yameen sacked Gayoom as the nominal president of the PPM. Gayoom’s three-decade rule of the Maldives ended in 2008 when Nasheed became the first president elected in a contested election. Nasheed and Gayoom recently announced an alliance to oppose Yameen.
Before launching the impeachment resolution, Nasheed said: “If we succeed, as we expect, the president will be reduced to a lame duck and will have to carry out reforms reversing the anti-democratic measures he has introduced.” Nasheed claims that he is attempting to make the forthcoming 2018 presidential election free and fair.
Nasheed wants the removal of a law introduced last year by Yameen banning anyone convicted of terrorism from running for president. The anti-democratic law was specifically introduced to prevent Nasheed from contesting the election. MDP leader Nasheed was charged and convicted of terrorism, after ordering the arrest and detention of former Chief Justice Abdulla Mohamed in 2012. Nasheed was sentenced to 13 years jail but was later released under pressure from the US and Britain.
Nasheed is openly attempting to bring the country’s foreign policy into line with Washington’s agenda. Speaking to Colombo-based foreign correspondents on Wednesday, he said that if elected, his government would change the terms of China-funded projects in Maldives. “We will learn from the experience of the Sri Lankan Ports Minister Arjuna Ranatunga in re-negotiating the deal over Chinese built Hambantota project,” he said.
Nasheed’s comments are significant. Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena was elected in January 2015, following a regime-change operation against former President Mahinda Rajapakse orchestrated by the US with the backing of India. The US was hostile to Rajapakse’s close relations with Beijing.
After coming to power, Sirisena and his new government suspended all Chinese-funded projects—the terms of these projects are still under discussion—and has developed close political and military relations with the US.
Nasheed said that Chinese loans constitute about 70 to 80 percent of foreign debt and if elected his administration would “seek the restitution of transactions and properties unlawfully seized from citizens by the government.” The MDP has attacked the Yameen government over the 99-year land leases granted to Chinese companies that open the way for Beijing to build a permanent base in the archipelago.
Nasheed accuses Yameen of corruption and authoritarianism. He told Colombo-based journalists that the US, EU and Canada were openly supporting the Maldives opposition and suggested that he had behind-the-scenes support from India and Sri Lanka.
Former Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga has called on Nasheed and Gayoom to come together against Yameen. This, she declared, would “ensure democratic governance and the guarantee of civil and political rights.” Kumaratunga was a major player in the Washington inspired regime-change operations against Rajapakse in Sri Lanka.
The US embassy to Sri Lanka and Maldives also issued a statement on March 28 favouring Nasheed. “We call on the government to restore faith in democratic processes by ensuring free and impartial proceedings in parliament,” it said, and that “irregularities” over the impeachment motion had impeded a free and fair vote in the Maldives parliament.
The US-based Foreign Policy magazine has also backed Nasheed. In an article entitled “Democracy is Drowning in Maldives” on March 29, it states that his “decision to run for office has guaranteed a game-changing year not only for his own political carrier but also for the future of democracy in the South Asian Island.”
While the Yameen government is authoritarian and anti-democratic, Nasheed is not concerned about “future of democracy” in Maldives. In power, Nasheed used the state apparatus to suppress opposition protests. The MDP leader is attempting to integrate Maldives into the US war preparation against China. Like Sri Lanka, Washington is determined to secure this strategically important location in the Indian Ocean as a key component of any future war.