26 Apr 2017

USIP Generation Change Fellowship Program for Developing Countries 2017

Application Deadline: 15th May 2017
Eligible Countries: Afghanistan, Iraq, Central African Republic, Colombia, Myanmar, Tunisia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, or be of Syrian origin living and working in Lebanon, Turkey or Jordan.
About the Award: The program will bring a group of 28 youth peacebuilders to Dharamsala for two days of conversation with the Dalai Lama to discuss ways in which youth can partner with international leaders to build peace. Selected youth will come from some of the world’s most conflict-ridden areas.
Type: Fellowship
Eligibility: 
  • Must reside and work in Afghanistan, Iraq, Central African Republic, Colombia, Myanmar, Tunisia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, or be of Syrian origin living and working in Lebanon, Turkey or Jordan.
  • Must be 18-35 years old.
  • Must be able to read, write and speak English.
  • Must hold a leadership role in an organization that does peacebuilding work.
  • Must have a passport that is valid through May 2018.
Number of Awards: 28
Duration of Program: November 3-9, 2017
How to Apply: Submission should include:
• A completed application form via Survey Monkey
• A list of three references with contact information e-mailed to
GenChange@usip.org
• An updated CV e-mailed to GenChange@usip.org
• A scanned copy of a valid passport e-mailed to GenChange@usip.org
Please submit the application using Survey Monkey. Please e-mail all attachments in one e-mail to GenChange@usip.org. The e-mail subject line should read: SURNAME, HHDL application. Submissions that are incomplete or late will not be considered.
Applications will be accepted no later than May 15, 2017 at 17:00 (GMT -4:00).  All inquiries should be sent to GenChange@usip.org.
Award Provider: The U.S. Institute of Peace
Important Notes: Selected participants will be notified by email by July15, 2017.  If you are not notified by this time, you have not been selected.

Fully-Funded Rotary Peace Fellowship for Masters and Professional Programs 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 31st May 2017

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: All countries are eligible

Eligible Field of Study: Master’s degree studies in the fields of international relations, sustainable development, peace studies, and conflict resolution and professional development certificate in peace and conflict studies.
About Fellowship:Rotary-Foundation Each year, Rotary selects up to 100 individuals from around the world to receive fully funded academic fellowships at one of its peace centers. These fellowships cover tuition and fees, room and board, round-trip transportation, and all internship and field-study expenses.
In just over a decade, the Rotary Peace Centers have trained more than 900 fellows for careers in peace building. Many of them go on to serve as leaders in national governments, NGOs, the military, law enforcement, and international organizations like the United Nations and World Bank.
Offered Since: Just over a decade
Fellowship Type: Two types of peace fellowships are available.
  1. Master’s degree
Offers master’s degree fellowships at premier universities in fields related to peace and conflict prevention and resolution. Programs last 15 to 24 months and require a practical internship of two to three months during the academic break. Each year, up to 50 master’s degree fellowships are awarded at these institutions: Duke University and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA, International Christian University, Japan, University of Bradford, England, University of Queensland, Australia and Uppsala University, Sweden
  1. Professional development certificate
For experienced professionals working in peace-related fields who want to enhance their professional skills, Rotary offer a three-month program in peace and conflict prevention and resolution at Chulalongkorn University in Thailand. This program incorporates two to three weeks of field study. We award up to 50 certificates each year.
Eligibility: The Rotary Peace Fellowship is designed for professionals with work experience in international relations or peace and conflict prevention and resolution. Fellows are committed to community and international service and the pursuit of peace.
Applicants must also meet the following requirements:
  • Proficiency in English; proficiency in a second language is strongly recommended
  • Strong commitment to international understanding and peace as demonstrated through professional and academic achievements and personal or community service
  • Excellent leadership skills
  • Master’s degree applicants: minimum three years of related full-time work or volunteer experience, bachelor’s degree
  • Certificate applicants: minimum five years of related full-time work or volunteer experience, strong academic background
Eligibility restrictions: Rotary Peace Fellowships may not be used for doctoral study. And the following people are not eligible for the master’s degree program:
  • Active and honorary Rotary members
  • Employees of a Rotary club or district, Rotary International, or other Rotary entity
  • Spouses, lineal descendants (children or grandchildren by blood or legal adoption), spouses of lineal descendants, or ancestors (parents or grandparents by blood) of any living person in these categories
  • Former Rotary members and their relatives as described above (within 36 months of their resignation)
Recipients of Rotary Ambassadorial Scholarships or professional development certificate fellowships must wait three years after completion of the scholarship or fellowship to apply for the master’s degree program.
Rotary Peace Fellows who have completed the master’s degree program must wait five years to apply for the certificate program.
Number of Scholarships: up to 100
Value of Scholarship: The Rotary Peace Fellowship covers:
  • -Tuition and fees
  • -Room and board
  • -Round-trip transportation
  • -Internship/field study expenses.
Duration of Scholarship: last 15 to 24 months
To be taken at (country): Duke University and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA, International Christian University, Japan, University of Bradford, England, University of Queensland, Australia, Uppsala University, Sweden and Chulalongkorn University in Thailand
How to Apply
Applications are now accepted for the 2018/19 Rotary Peace Fellowships program. Candidates have until 31 May to submit applications to their district. Districts must submit endorsed applications to The Rotary Foundation by 1 July.
Sponsors: Rotary International


IWMF Reporting Fellowships to Zanzibar, Tanzania 2017

Application Deadline: 19th May 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: All
To be taken at (country): Zanzibar, Tanzania
About the Award: As part of the African Great Lakes Reporting Initiative, a group of six journalists will report from Zanzibar, a semi-autonomous island off the east coast of mainland Tanzania, covering stories related to the trip theme of civic engagement.
Applicants are asked to pitch stories relevant to the trip location and theme; stories must focus on in-depth and new narratives and be notably different from those reported on previous Fellowships. We will prioritize applications with creative, thoughtful, and original pitches.
To date, 91 journalists from 23 countries have pursued a wide range of topics that go beyond the well-established beats of political instability, armed conflict, and humanitarian crisis in the region.
During the next two years, the IWMF will continue to lead groups of women journalists to the Central African Republic (CAR), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Rwanda, South Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda. By 2019, more than 250 reporters will have together reshaped traditional media narratives around the region.
Type: Fellowship
Eligibility:
  • Affiliated or freelance women journalists currently working full time in the news media, with three (3) or more years of professional experience. Internships do not count toward professional experience.
  • Women journalists of all nationalities are welcome to apply.
  • Non-native English speakers must be proficient in English in order to fully participate in and benefit from the program.
  • Applicants must be able to show proof of interest from an editor or have a proven track record of publication in prominent media outlets (a letter from an editor is strongly preferred).
Value of Fellowship: The IWMF arranges travel and in-country logistics for all Fellows within the scope of the Fellowship base location and trip dates. The IWMF also covers Fellowship-related costs within the framework of the reporting trip including travel, lodging, meals, and fixers/interpreters, unless a selected journalist’s news organization wishes to assume these costs. Visa costs will also be covered. Fellows living outside the U.S. are responsible for procuring all necessary visas, for which they will be reimbursed at the conclusion of the Fellowship.
Duration of Fellowship: August 6-19, 2017
How to Apply: Apply here
Award Provider: International Women’s Media Foundation (IWMF)
Important Notes: Please note that the feasibility of day trips outside Zanzibar will be assessed by IWMF staff and trip leaders on a case-by-case basis.

Commonwealth Scholarships in Low and Middle Income Countries (South Africa and Sri Lanka) 2017

Application Deadline: 30th June 2017
Eligible Countries: Low and Middle Income Countries
To be taken at (country): South Africa and Sri Lanka.
Scholarships in South Africa are tenable at:
  • Cape Peninsula University of Technology
  • Durban University of Technology
  • North-West University
  • Rhodes University
  • Stellenbosch University
  • Tshwane University of Technology
  • University of Cape Town
  • University of Johannesburg
  • University of KwaZulu-Natal
  • University of Pretoria
  • University of South Africa
  • University of the Western Cape
  • University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg
  • University of Venda
Scholarships in Sri Lanka are tenable at:
  • University of Sri Jayewardenepura
  • University of Colombo
About the Award: These Commonwealth Master’s Scholarships allow successful applicants to benefit from the expertise provided by universities in low and middle income countries around the Commonwealth. They are majority funded by the Commonwealth Scholarship and Fellowship Plan (CSFP).
Type: Masters
Eligibility: 
  • Applicants must be a citizen of a Commonwealth country other than the host country.
  • Applicants must hold a Bachelors degree of at least upper second level.
Number of Awards: 6. four in South Africa and two in Sri Lanka
Value of Program: The scholarships are fully-funded. They provide full tuition fees, a return economy flight, an arrival allowance, and a regular stipend (living allowance).
How to Apply: It is important to go through the Program Webpage for details of what course are available and how to apply
Award Provider: Commonwealth Scholarship Commission

The Looting Machine Called Capitalism

Paul Craig Roberts

I have come to the conclusion that capitalism is successful primarily because it can impose the majority of the costs associated with its economic activities on outside parties and on the environment. In other words, capitalists make profits because their costs are externalized and born by others. In the US, society and the environment have to pick up the tab produced by capitalist activity.
In the past when critics raised the question about external costs, that is, costs that are external to the company although produced by the company’s activities, economists answered that it was not really a problem, because those harmed by the activity could be compensated for the damages that they suffered. This statement was intended to reinforce the claim that capitalism served the general welfare. However, the extremely primitive nature of American property rights meant that rarely would those suffering harm be compensated. The apologists for capitalism saved the system in the abstract, but not in reality.
My recent article, “The Destruction of Inlet Beach,” made it clear to me that very little, if any, of the real estate development underway would be profitable if the external costs imposed on existing property holders had to be compensated.
Consider just a few examples. When a taller house is constructed in front of one of less height, the Gulf view of the latter is preempted. The damage to the property value of the house whose view has been blocked is immense. Would the developer build such a tall structure if the disadvantaged existing property had to be compensated for the decline in its value?
When a house is built that can sleep 20 or 30 people next to a family’s vacation home or residence, the noise and congestion destroys the family’s ability to enjoy their own property. If they had to be compensated for their loss, would the hotel, disquised as a “single family dwelling” have been built?
Walton County, Florida, is so unconcerned about these vital issues that it has permitted construction of structures that can accommodate 30 people, but provide only three parking spaces. Where do the rental guests park? How many residents will find themselves blocked in their own driveways or with cars parked on their lawns?
As real estate developers build up congestion, travel times are extended. What formerly was a 5 minute drive from Inlet Beach to Seaside along 30-A can now take 45 minutes during summer and holidays, possibly longer. Residents and visitors pay the price of the developers’ profits in lost time. The road is a two-lane road that cannot be widened. Yet Walton County’s planning department took no account of the gridlock that would emerge.
As the state and federal highways serving the area were two lanes, over-development made hurricane evacuation impossible. Florida and US taxpayers had to pay for turning two lane highways into four lane highways in order to provide some semblance of hurricane evacuation. After a decade, the widening of highway 79, which runs North-South is still not completed to its connection to Interstate 10. Luckily, there have been no hurricanes.
If developers had to pay these costs instead of passing them on to taxpayers, would their projects still be profitable?
Now consider the external costs of offshoring the production of goods and services that US corporations, such as Apple and Nike, market to Americans. When production facilities in the US are closed and the jobs are moved to China, for example, the American workers lose their jobs, medical coverage, careers, pension provision, and often their self-respect when they are unable to find comparable employment or any employment. Some fall behind in their mortgage and car payments and lose their homes and cars. The cities, states, and federal governments lose the tax base as personal income and sales taxes decline and as depressed housing and commercial real estate prices in the abandoned communities depress property taxes. Social security and Medicare funding is harmed as payroll tax deposits fall. State and local infrastructure declines. Possibly crime rises. Safety net needs rise, but expenditures are cut as tax revenues decline. Municipal and state workers find their pensions at risk. Education suffers. All of these costs greatly exceed Apple’s and Nike’s profits from substituting cheaper foreign labor for American labor. Contradicting the neoliberal claims, Apple’s and Nike’s prices do not drop despite the collapse in labor costs that the corporations experience.
A country that was intelligently governed would not permit this. As the US is so poorly governed, the executives and shareholders of global corporations are greatly enriched because they can impose the costs associated with their profits on external third parties.
The unambigious fact is that US capitalism is a mechanism for looting the many for the benefit of the few. Neoliberal economics was constructed in order to support this looting. In other words, neoliberal economists are whores just like the Western print and TV media.
Yet, Americans are so insouciant that you will hear those who are being looted praise the merits of “free market capitalism.”
So far we have barely scratched the surface of the external costs that capitalism imposes. Now consider the polution of the air, soil, waterways, and oceans that result from profit-making activities. Consider the radioactive wastes pouring out of Fukushima since March 2011 into the Pacific Ocean. Consider the dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico from agricultural chemical fertilizer run-off. Consider the destruction of the Apalachicola, Florida, oyster beds from the restricted river water that feeds the bay due to overdevelopment upstream. Examples such as these are endless. The corporations responsible for this destruction bear none of the costs.
If it turns out that global warming and ocean acidification are consequences of capitalism’s carbon-based energy system, the entire world could end up dead from the external costs of capitalism.
Free market advocates love to ridicule economic planning, and Alan Greenspan and Larry Summers actually said that “markets are self-regulating.” There is no sign anywhere of this self-regulation. Instead, there are external costs piled upon external costs. The absence of planning is why over-development has made 30-A dysfunctional, and it is why over-development has made metropolitan areas, such as Atlanta, Georgia, dysfunctional. Planning does not mean the replacement of markets. It means the provision of rules that produce rational results instead of shifting costs of development onto third parties.
If capitalism had to cover the cost of its activities, how many of the activities would pay?
As capitalists do not have to cover their external costs, what limits the costs?
Once the external costs exceed the biosphere’s ability to process the waste products associated with external costs, life ends.
We cannot survive an unregulated capitalism with a system of primitive property rights. Ecological economists such as Herman Daly understand this, but neoliberal economists are apologists for capitalist looting. In days gone by when mankind’s footprint on the planet was light, what Daly calls an “empty world,” productive activities did not produce more wastes than the planet could cleanse. But the heavy foot of our time, what Daly calls a “full world,” requires extensive regulation. The Trump administration’s program of rolling back environmental protection, for example, will multiply external costs. To claim that this will increase economic growth is idiotic. As Daly (and Michael Hudson) emphasize, the measure known as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is so flawed that we do not know whether the increased output costs more to produce than it is worth. GDP is really a measure of what has been looted without reference to the cost of the looting. Environmental deregulation means that capitalists can treat the environment as a garbage dump. The planet can become so toxic that it cannot recover.
In the United States and generally across the Western world, property rights exist only in a narrow, truncated form. A developer can steal your view forever and your solitude for the period his construction requires. If the Japanese can have property rights in views, in quiet which requires noise abatement, and in sun fall on their property, why can’t Americans? After all, we are alleged to be the “exceptional people.”
But in actual fact, Americans are the least exceptional people in human history. Americans have no rights at all. We hapless insignificant beings have to accept whatever capitalists and their puppet government impose on us. And we are so stupid we call it “Freedom and Democracy America.”

North Korea’s Antidote to the US

Manuel E. Yepe

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), North Korea, or Communist Korea is one of the most systematic targets of the pejorative and slanderous propaganda carried out by capitalist-controlled media at a global scale.
But the DPRK has never succumbed to Washington’s intimidation. This has generated, around the world, admiration for the very fact of its survival; and solidarity for the courage with which it faces so much negative propaganda.
Pyongyang has never shown signs of wavering in the face of such threats and, on the contrary, it has even dared to develop a reduced arsenal of nuclear weapons for self-defense in the event that the United States tries to assert its dominance by launching another war like the one it carried out in the nineteen-fifties.
In the wake of the most recent US military provocations against North Korea and the usual firmness of its replies, the US journalist Mike Whitney has published a comprehensive article in the digital magazine CounterPunch recalling that:
“Washington has never made any effort to conceal its contempt for North Korea. In the 64 years since the war ended, the US has done everything in its power to punish, humiliate and inflict pain on the Communist country.”
“Washington has subjected the DPRK to starvation; it has prevented its government from accessing foreign capital and markets; it has strangled its economy with crippling economic sanctions; and has installed lethal missile systems and military bases on its doorstep.”
“Negotiations aren’t possible,” says Whitney, because Washington refuses to sit down with a country which it sees as its inferior. Instead, the US has strong-armed China to do its bidding by using their diplomats as interlocutors who are expected to convey Washington’s ultimatums as threateningly as possible. The hope, of course, is that Pyongyang will cave in to Uncle Sam’s bullying and do what they are told.”
“There’s no country in the world that needs nuclear weapons more than North Korea. Brainwashed Americans, who get their news from FOX or CNN, may differ on this point, but if a hostile nation deployed carrier strike-groups off the coast of California while conducting massive war games on the Mexican then they might see things differently. They might see the value of having a few nuclear weapons to deter that hostile nation from doing something really stupid.”
According to Whitney, “the only reason Kim Jong Un hasn’t joined Saddam and Gadhafi in the great hereafter, is because the DPRK has the capacity to reduce Seoul, Okinawa and Tokyo into smoldering debris-fields. Absent Kim’s WMDs, Pyongyang would have faced a preemptive attack long ago and Kim would have faced a fate similar to Gadhafi’s. “Nuclear weapons are the only known antidote to US adventurism,” says the journalist.
“In the early 1950s, during the Korean War, the US dropped more bombs on North Korea than it had dropped in the entire Pacific theater during World War II. This carpet bombing, which included 32,000 tons of napalm, often deliberately targeted civilian as well as military targets. Whole cities were destroyed, with many thousands of innocent civilians killed and many more left homeless and hungry.”
The United States killed over 2 million people in a country that posed no threat to US national security.
Like Vietnam, the Korean War was just another muscle-flexing exercise the US periodically engages in whenever it gets bored or needs some far-flung location to try out its new weapons systems. The US had nothing to gain in its aggression on the Korean peninsula.
“In the US, most people think the problem lies with North Korea, but it doesn’t,” explains Whitney.” The problem lies with the United States; it’s unwillingness to negotiate an end to the war, its unwillingness to provide basic security guarantees to the North, its unwillingness to even sit down with the people who –through Washington’s own stubborn ignorance– are now developing long-range ballistic missiles that will be capable of hitting American cities.
According to Whitney, “relations with the North can be normalized, economic ties can be strengthened, trust can be restored, and the nuclear threat can be defused. The situation with the North does not have to be a crisis, it can be fixed. It just takes a change in policy, a bit of give-and-take, and leaders that genuinely want peace more than war.

Prosecution of Assange is Persecution of Free Speech

Nozomi Hayase

US authorities are reported to have prepared charges to seek the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. This overreach of US government toward a publisher, whose principle is aligned with the U.S. Constitution, is another sign of a crumbling façade of democracy. The Justice Department in the Obama administration could not prosecute WikiLeaks for publishing documents pertaining to the US government, because they struggled to determine whether the First Amendment protection applied in this case. Now, the torch of Obama’s war on whistleblowers seems to have been passed on to Trump, who had shown disdain toward free speech and even called the U.S. media as “enemies of the people”.
Earlier this month, CIA Director Mike Pompeo vowed to end WikiLeaks, accusing the whistleblowing site as being a “non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia”. He also once called Edward Snowden a traitor and claimed that he should be executed. This declaration of war against WikiLeaks may bring a reminiscence of George W. Bush’s speech in the aftermath of 9-11, where he said, ‘either you are with us or against us’, and urged the nation to side with the government in his call to fight global ‘war on terror’.
In a recent interview on DemocracyNow!, journalist at The Intercept, Glenn Greenwald put this persecution of WikiLeaks in the context of a government assault on basic freedom. He spelled out their tactics, noting how the government first chooses a target group that is hated and lacks popular support, for they know attacking an idea or a group that is popular would meet resistance. He explained:
“…. they pick somebody who they know is hated in society or who expresses an idea that most people find repellent, and they try and abridge freedom of speech in that case, so that most people will let their hatred for the person being targeted override the principle involved, and they will sanction or at least acquiesce to the attack on freedom because they hate the person being attacked”.
Demonizing and scapegoating of a particular group or organization is an alarming tendency toward an authoritarian state. At a news conference last Thursday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions also chimed in to emphasize how Assange’s arrest is a priority. This targeting of WikiLeaks is a threat to press freedom and could be seen a slippery slope toward fascism.
History Repeats Itself
Recall the Weimer Republic just before the rise of Adolf Hitler. He was successfully able to install hatred in the minds of Germans and carry out massive crimes against humanity. Americans often wondered what made many ordinary Germans accept these horrendous acts that led to the holocaust. Now, in Trump’s America, it is not so far a stretch to say that Muslims, Mexicans and other immigrants are becoming like the new Jews, to be a scapegoated under this right wing administration.
Once he gained power, Hitler made his word to be above the law. Trump, in his first 75 days in office, turned the rhetoric of hatred into action through passing executive order barring refuges and citizens from seven majority Muslim nations from entering into the United States and enacting mass deportation with the ICE agents acting like Nazi Gestapo to track immigrants. Draconian policies that were more under the radar during the Obama administration are now becoming overt. More and more, Americans might now be able to get under the skin of those ‘Good Germans’.
In Hitler’s Germany, persecution of Jews didn’t happen overnight. It was a gradual escalation. The first thing Hitler did was to control media and create an arm of propaganda. By using this weapon of mass deception, the Nazi Regime garnered popular support on a platform of racial identity and nationalism and managed to brainwash citizens with the Nazi-Auschwitz ideology of anti-Semitism. Under the guise of fighting communism, the Party suppressed civil liberties, free speech and association and expanded its power by demonizing whoever stood in their way.
Identity Politics and Machination of Power
The Trump campaign slogan “Make America Great Again” spoke to middle class America and disfranchised populations who were fed up with corporate plunder enacted under Democrats. His message of putting America first also struck a chord with white nationalists. By channeling their frustration and desires, Trump successfully created a fertile soil to harvest identity politics that is now coming to resemble Nazi’s emphasis of nationalism and racial supremacy.
No one can deny how the Trump victory empowered white supremacist groups that until now were more on the fringe. These identity politics that seem to be spreading around the world tend to contract one’s heart. Whatever the ideology is, progressive or conservative, anyone gripped with it falls into a narrow vision of humanity and loses perspective. This identity, fixed by ideology becomes a point of manipulation, to be exploited by those in power and used to divide everyone into ‘Us vs. Them’.
When people lose capacity for dialogue, they become deaf to their own humanity. Then, the state can easily exert control over the masses and seize power through manufacturing wars of all against all. We are now seeing a new civil war unfolding in America. The city of Berkeley is becoming a battleground. In February, riots erupted on the UC Berkeley campus when protesters shut down an event scheduled for right wing commentator Milo Yiannopoulos. Also, at the recent free speech rally on Patriot Day, Trump supporters, along with members of far-right nationalists clashed with local activists and anti-fascist groups. Ironically, the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement in the 60’s turned into a bloody fight, devolving into violence, with each camp acting totally contrary to the principles of free speech.
Height of McCarthy Era Hysteria
This attack against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks is not something new. Consorted efforts to delegitimatize the organization through character assassination and smearing of Assange have been persistent, ever since the site came to public prominence. Assange was called a high tech terrorist by former vice President Joe Biden and incitement for his murder came from high US officials.
Assange has been holed up in asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy for 5 years, despite a UN ruling clearly stating his detention is unlawful. This is not the first time he and his organization were declared to be enemies of the State. In 2012, the US military had designated them as such enemies.
So what is different now? The head of the CIA and the Department of Justice’s declaration of war against WikiLeaks comes in a particular political climate. These efforts to arrest Assange, now backed by President Trump are taking place at the height of a kind of McCarthy era style hysteria.
Just like the recent US government cruise missile attacks on Syria, carried out without any investigation or evidence that Assad was the one using chemical weapons, the echo- chamber of the liberal media has been amplifying their own speculation of WikiLeaks alleged source of DNC leaks and Podesta emails. With the narrative that Russia meddled in the US election, they branded Assange as a Putin sympathizer and/or Russian agent without backing it up. The Left’s seeming irrational obsession with Russia is also rooted in these identity politics, namely their allegiance to the Democratic Party and America’s post-cold war national identity, defined by a hysteric red scare and its mission of defeating communism.
Whistleblowers as Democracy’s Last Line of Defense
In the wake of the possible arrest of Assange, the ACLU noted that, “prosecuting Wikileaks would set a dangerous precedent that the Trump administration would surely use to target other news organizations.” We must never forget where hatred-driven identity politics led Nazi Germany. Martin Niemöller, the famous Protestant pastor who spoke against the rise of Hitler and spent years in concentration camps, reminds us of this:
“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out –Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out –Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out –Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.”
Fascism begins in the mind. Its seed grows whenever we accept hatred toward someone who has different or opposing views. Enclosure happens when we suspend critical thinking in the hype of fear and turn the other into an enemy. It happens every time we close our hearts, shunning those who have been made into our enemies. Democracy dies whenever we choose to pick up the sword of ideology, rather than choosing to uphold our common humanity and instead engage in a self-righteous crusade of defeating the enemy.
When Trump signed a Muslim ban into law, outrage spread nationwide and people rallied at airports. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit refused to reinstate Trump’s travel ban and so the solidarity of the people won. As Trump pressured to cut funds in sanctuary cities, these cities defied the order, assuring to maintain their immigrant policy. Now, the US government is coming after WikiLeaks, a transnational journalistic organization, who has no allegiance to any nation, governments or corporations, only to the conscience of ordinary people around the world.
In the darkness that hovers in the veil of ideology, whistleblowers shine a light, through which we are able to recover perspectives that were lost. WikiLeaks, through their act of publishing, lets everyone see views that are forbidden, marginalized or shunned. They are last line of defense and are on the front line in this battle for democracy. One may dislike WikiLeaks and disagree with Assange, but whatever one’s opinion is, we all need to stand up against this erosion of our civil liberties. Prosecution of WikiLeaks is persecution of free speech. Setting this precedent moves us down a dangerous path.

Short Choices: The French Presidential Elections

Binoy Kampmark

The establishment got another burning in the French elections on Sunday, revealing again that there is no level of voter disgust that will not find some voice in the current range of elections.  The terror for pollsters and the establishment now is whether Marine Le Pen will realise her anti-Euro project and drag the French nation kicking and moaning into a new, even more fractious order. In her way will be the pro-European Union figure of Emmanuel Macron.
The French example is similar to others of recent times: parties with presumed tenure were confined to a punitive dustbin, rubbished for stale, estranged obsolescence.  The Gaullists got what was a fair drubbing – 19.9 percent for François Fillon of the Republicans, a figure crusted and potted with corruption.
It did not, however, mean that both candidates in the first and second positions were political virgins.  In that sense, the US election remains an exemplar, a true shock.  France retains a traditional appearance to it, albeit a violently ruffled one.
Macron, with his 23.9 percent, supposedly deemed outside the establishment, still held office as minister for economy, finance and industry but flew the Socialist coop in opportunistic fancy.  Blooded in traditional harness, he has managed to give the impression that he has shed enough of the old for the new, notably with his movement En Marche.  He is blowing hard from what commentators have termed a “centrist” position.  (To be at the centre is to be in the middle, which is not necessarily a good thing in current times.)
Just to weaken the sense of Macron as outsider, both establishment parties – the Socialist, led by Benoît Hamon, and the Republican –urged voters to go for the centrist option.  This all had the appearance of a gentleman’s seedy agreement, plotted in a traditional smoking room to undermine an unlikable contender.  The losers wanted to be vicarious winners.  The tarnished Fillon urged voters to “reflect on your conscience.” In effect, Macron as a quantity is being sanitised for stability, the firebreak against the Le Pen revolution.
Le Pen herself speaks to a particular French and nationalist sensibility, tutored to a large extent by her father, who also ran in the 2002 Presidential elections and lost to Jacques Chirac.  She is hardly one to be unfamiliar with the political argot, which has retained a reactionary punch in more measured guise.
Le Pen kept her approach punchily traditional, milking the killing last Thursday of a policeman on the Champs-Elysees with old apple and oranges comparisons on security and immigration.  Having her in the Presidential office would see the stop of “mass immigration and the free movement of terrorists.”
For Le Pen, the May 7 runoff election would enable a choice to be made between “savage globalisation that threatens our civilisation” and “borders that protect our jobs, our security and our national identity.”
Macron provides an attractive target for the Front National: having worked for Rothschild, he supplies the front for corporate interests, and is “Hollande’s baby” uninterested in French patriotism.  He certainly promises to be friendlier to companies in France, with a policy envisaging a cut of the corporate tax rate from 33 percent to 25 percent, while also permitting them to re-negotiate the sacred 35-hour week.  His vision of the European Union, in short, is business as usual.
Under Le Pen’s particular tent lie appeals to critics of globalisation, a force that has rented and sunk various industries while also seeking to reform the French labour market.  But this nostalgic throw back entails barriers and bridges, building fortifications, holding firm and wishing for the best.
Jean-Luc Mélenchon proved to be another dark horse, the spicy left-wing option to Le Pen, and a candidate who experienced a surge of popularity prior to the poll.  His result is a story that has invigorated the left while gutting the socialists, providing us a reminder of the time of a greater radicalism.
“Len Pen,” claims Roger Martelli, “was counting on turning this election into a fight with the Socialist party government, but she had to compete with a radicalized right-wing opposition and socialist opponents who had moved more sharply to the left than she had expected.”
Nor were things pretty for Hamon, with a devastating result to compare to Gaston Defferre’s 5 per cent showing in 1969.  The socialists reformed by the 1971 Épinay Congress in the wake of that electoral catastrophe, have been well and truly buried.
What Mélenchon’s popularity suggests is that the European system, at least the model as it stands, needs reform and a degree of disentangling vis-à-vis the state.  Nor has he told his supporters to vote for Macron, a paternalistic ploy that can irritate voters.
“None of us will vote for the far-right,” went the consultation to 450,000 registered supporters of the France Untamed movement.  “But does it mean we need to give voting advice?” As Der Spiegel opined with characteristic gloominess, “The presidential election in France is becoming yet another end game over Europe’s political future.”
Much will depend on voter turnout come May, and the seasoned opportunism of Le Pen.  Her latest play is to place herself above partisan considerations by stepping down from the leadership of the National Front.  “So, this evening, I am no longer the president of the National Front.  I am the candidate for the French presidency.”

Egyptian Kangaroo Court Sentences 20 People To Death

Abdus Sattar Ghazali

A court of Egyptian military leader, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who assumed the title of Field Marshal after overthrowing the elected President Mohamed Morsi in July 2013, Monday sentenced 20 supporters of Morsi to death.
The brutal military dictator el-Sisi has been cracking down on the opposition since the overthrow of President Morsi. He has killed more than 800 protesters in a single day, and has imprisoned tens of thousands of dissidents since he took power.
Not surprisingly, el-Sisi became President in a controversial election in 2014.
In July 2013, the ouster of President Morsi sparked many protests by his supporters, including a pair that were held at al-Nahda Square and Rabaa al-Adawiya Square in Cairo on August 13, 2013, which led to the killing of several hundreds of demonstrators by security police.
Rights groups say the army’s crackdown on the supporters of Morsi has led to the deaths of over 1,400 people and arrest of 22,000 others, including some 200 people who have been sentenced to death in mass trials.
In late 2014, an Egyptian court issued death sentences to 188 Morsi supporters, which sparked an international outcry against the controversial verdicts. In 2015, the death penalties were reduced in 149 cases.
In October 2016 a kangaroo court in Cairo confirmed a 20-year prison sentence against Mohamed Morsi. In April 2015, a Cairo court had sentenced Morsi to 20 years in prison for inciting violence against protesters who had staged a sit-in outside the Ittihadiya presidential palace in December 2012, when Morsi was still in power.
Mohamed Ahmed, an expert at the Amnesty International, said in a press statement last month that “Egypt is currently facing a severe human rights crisis that can never be compared to the situation during Mubarak’s rule,” referring to former dictator Hosni Mubarak who was toppled after a popular revolt in 2011.
Amnesty International annual report of 2016/2017 said: “The authorities used mass arbitrary arrests to suppress demonstrations and dissent, detaining journalists, human rights defenders and protesters, and restricted the activities of human rights organizations. The National Security Agency (NSA) subjected hundreds of detainees to enforced disappearance; officers of the NSA and other security forces tortured and otherwise ill-treated detainees. Security forces used excessive lethal force during regular policing and in incidents that may have amounted to extrajudicial executions.”
Criminal courts continued to conduct mass unfair trials involving dozens — sometimes hundreds — of defendants on charges of participating in protests and political violence following the ousting of Mohamed Morsi as president in July 2013, the Amnesty report said adding: In some trials involving defendants who had been subjected to enforced disappearance, courts accepted “confessions” obtained through torture as evidence.
Interestingly, an Egyptian kangaroo court on March 2, 2017 acquitted former Egyptian dictator Air Marshal Hosni Mubarak over his involvement in the killings of hundreds of protesters in 2011. The US-client Air Marshal Hosni Mubarak ruled for more than 30 years. In June 2012 he resigned and handed over power to army.
In addition to dedicated special courts for terrorism-related trials, military courts unfairly tried hundreds of civilians, including in mass trials, the Amnesty report pointed out adding: In August the authorities extended a law vastly expanding the jurisdiction of military courts to include crimes committed against “public installations” for a further five years.

Africa’s War Lord Queen; The Bloodstained Career of Liberia’s Eleanor Sirleaf Johnson

Thomas C. Mountain

Eleanor Sirleaf Johnson is the Harvard educated, Nobel Prize winning President of Liberia with a long bloodstained history of support for warlords both past and present. She used to be the de facto foreign minister for that most bloodthirsty of warlords former Liberian “President” Charles Taylor, and she addressed the US Congress in his support.
President Johnson is the queen of the warlords, for she has granted fiefdoms to many of Charles Taylor’s top Capos in todays Liberia. This is the Charles Taylor that is an incarcerated war criminal having been found guilty of crimes against humanity by that pack of western lickspittles enthroned at the International Criminal Court.
Thats right, the ruling President in Liberia was the right hand woman for a serious killer and today is surrounded by many of his most notorious warlords.
Interestingly enough, Charles Taylor was convicted by the ICC of crimes against humanity for crimes he committed in…Sierra Leone? But wasn’t Charles Taylor President of Liberia? Yes, and he committed all sorts of terrible acts in Liberia for much longer than he did during his invasion of Sierra Leone during its bitter civil war, but the ICC couldn’t touch anything Liberian for it would leave Eleanor Sirleaf Johnson with blood on her hands for the world to see.
You see President Johnson was hand picked by the USA and it lackeys at the UN to rule Liberia when the Charles Taylor regime finally collapsed, doing so under the rubric of “democracy”, never mind Ms. Johnson tends to run unopposed?
To give you an idea just how rotten things are, the Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission, in front of which Ms. Johnson testified, issued an opinion calling for Ms. Johnson to be barred for life from Liberian politics.
When one speaks of warlords it is meant literally, for the lords of war under Charles Taylor now rule much of the Liberian economy and critical government departments. John T. Richardson was appointed head of the Housing Authority and was a top commander for Charles Taylor and is infamous for being the commander of the operation where 5 American nuns were murdered. Eugene Nagbe was a senior commander under Taylor and was appointed Minister of Information. Roland Dou was a senior frontlline commander and is now head of special operations at the National Security Agency along side President
Johnson’s step son Fomba Sirleaf. Charles Taylors wife, Jewel Howard-Taylor has been a Senator and is being touted as the next Vice President. And the list goes on and on, exposing how some of the worst criminals in neo colonial Africa are ensconced as warlords high up in the national crime syndicate that rules Liberia.
In the mining industry, a mainstay of the economy, many undercover documentaries have exposed how Liberia’s “government” is little more than an extortion racket run by gangsters. Pay to Play? Cash and Carry? Anything goes, never mind the environment and disaster for the locals.
As the Ebola epidemic exposed, there is little in the way of government services for ordinary Liberians, How could there be when corruption and graft are so entrenched?
For years now, while the capital city Monrovia lacked such basic services as electricity and running water, the western banksters, their minions in government and the media kept up a cacophony of praise for the Queen of African Warlords, going so far as to anoint Eleanor Sirleaf Johnson with the Nobel Peace Prize. And this for someone who stood front and center in the ranks of those who supported Charles Taylor?
Charles Taylor was a warlord who did whatever it took to preserve his power, and always worried that his mentors, if convenient, would hand him over to the ICC without qualms, which is what they did. His “trial” was fully sanitized and the automatic guilty verdict pronounced with the necessary pomp and circumstance. And the African Queen of the Warlords, Eleanor Sirleaf Johnson, would escape scott free, and remain on her throne, overseeing so much misery and suffering that Liberia should rightfully be considered a failed state, as exposed by the Ebola epidemic.
Yet Ms. Johnson is regularly welcomed in black American churches across the USA, held up as an example of “a good African” to those with the same skin color but no affinity for any real connection to the African motherland.
The Liberian diaspora in the USA has been active in educating the public about what really happened during the terrible Charles Taylor times and the present regimes links to him. Maybe the real story will see the light of day and Ms. Johnson will no longer be honored with such adulation, instead see the inside of a prison where she belongs.