6 Sept 2017

Marine Mammal Stranding: Myth, Mystery and Facts

Vijay Sakhuja


The stranding of marine mammals along India’s east coast astride the Bay of Bengal and west coast overlooking the Arabian Sea has been a recurring phenomenon. In 2016, 80 short-finned pilot whales were found stranded on the sand along the east coast. The largest stranding on the east coast took place off the Tuticorin coast in 1973 when 147 whales were found on the beach.

In August 2017, 18 feet long whale shark with a circumference of 10 feet and weighing nearly 3.5 tons washed up on Pamban beach in Tamil Nadu. The necropsy revealed a plastic spoon in the whale shark's digestive system. The state wildlife authorities cautioned that plastic waste was harming the marine eco-system and that marine species are unable to differentiate between floating plastic and prey. Unlike the Pamban stranding, the 47-foot whale discovered on the beaches of Ratnagiri district on the west coast in 2016 was successfully rescued and pulled into deeper waters. 

However, there have been at least 16 and 20 incidents of whale mortality along the west coast in 2015 and 2016 respectively. These figures are alarming given that between 2001 and 2014, whale deaths never exceeded four. 

Myth and Mystery
Stranding of marine animals along sea shores is not a new phenomenon. It happens across the globe on a regular basis but been part of myth as also an issue of mystery. Mammal stranding has baffled humankind since ancient times. Aristotle noted that it is not known why they run aground but asserted that “this happens when the fancy takes them and without any apparent reason.” The myth associated with the stranding of mammals is in the belief that Romans thought ‘stranding was a whale’s punishment for offending Neptune, the god of the seas’. 

However, with advancements in science, it is now known that there are a number of natural conditions including the movement of tectonic plates underwater resulting in shifts in magnetic field causing disorientation among marine animals. Also, man made circumstances result in mass stranding, even ‘suicides’, and these arise from marine pollution, use of Sonars by navies, presence of plastics in the oceans, and other commercial activities including offshore infrastructure activities.  

Facts: Marine Litter and Underwater Noise
There are at least two important reasons that can be attributed to the stranding of marine mammals along the shores. First, the growing menace of plastics in the oceans and seas has been identified as one of the important causes affecting health of marine life at sea as also the marine ecosystem. Over the past seven decades, plastic has emerged as a cheap and lightweight material for the packaging, auto parts and domestic durables industries. The annual global production of plastics is pegged at 300 million tons, and half of it is ‘single use’. Ironically, ‘disposable’ lifestyle habits and practices, poor plastic waste management and disposal techniques, lack of awareness among the public, and absence of serious policies on plastic use by governments including weak implementation mechanisms have resulted in nearly 8 million tons of plastic dumped annually into the oceans. Nearly 60 to 90 per cent of marine litter is plastic-based in the form of straws, plastic bags, fishing gear, food and beverage containers,  bottles, and large pieces of plastic made auto parts, making these are the most common forms of plastic pollution in the oceans.

Evidence exists of presence of plastic in mammals amid fears that over 50 per cent of sea turtles have consumed plastic. A necropsy of the sperm whale that beached and got stranded on Germany’s North Sea coast in 2016 found fishing gear and an engine cover inside the stomach. Scientists believe, among many other causes for stranding of the sperm whales, the ingested marine litter, can potentially “cause physical damage to their digestive systems” and “may eventually give the animals the sensation of being full and reduce their instinct to feed, leading to malnutrition.”

Second, marine noise generated by shipping and fishing trawlers, offshore exploration, laying of pipes and fiber optic cables as also use of Sonar by warships results in casualties in marine mammals. A recent study by the Indian Maritime Foundation, titled 'Impact of Maritime Security Policies on Marine Ecosystem' has observed that underwater noise in excess of “120dB can cause discomfort to these [marine] species, more than 170dB can cause serious internal injuries, bleeding and even hemorrhages, and noise beyond 200dB can cause instant death.”

Powerful Sonar transmissions can potentially lead to internal bleeding in mammals causing damage to ear and brain tissues, resulting in disorientation or death of mammals. There is also a belief that whales may even misunderstand Sonar waves as an attacker, and cause panic driving them towards shores. 

In the US, in 2016, the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in California observed that a 2012 regulation that allowed the US Navy to use low-frequency active sonar for training and testing violates the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has now announced stringent regulations on Sonar transmission and prohibits pulses of 180dB or more by the US Navy within 14 miles of any coastline, or within 0.6 miles of marine sensitive areas.

There is little doubt that marine litter in the form of plastics, and pollution due to human activity, are causing enormous damage to marine mammal and the marine ecosystem. While the global focus is on managing plastic pollution on land, marine litter can affect the food chain of the marine habitat as also human beings. It takes thousands of years for plastics to decay and toxins from the plastics have now begun to enter the human food chain and threatening health.

China's Indian Ocean Strategy

Tapan Bharadwaj


China is a regional maritime power in East Asian waters, and is increasing its presence in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). This rising presence depicts a pattern that is aimed to achieve its immediate maritime goal of multi-regional power projection capabilities. As the world's second largest economy, currently growing at the rate of around 6.5 per cent, China aims to enhance its naval power profile in accordance with its overall power profile.
Maritime power is an essential element of President Xi Jinping’s 'China Dream'. This was also reflected in China’s latest (2015) defence white paper, 'China’s Military Strategy': “The traditional mentality that land outweighs sea must be abandoned, and great importance has to be attached to managing the seas and oceans and protecting maritime rights and interests.”
China’s IOR Strategy
China’s strategy for its presence in the IOR has two dimensions. First, China is building ports in strategically locations ofthe IOR. For example, on 1 August 2017, China formally opened its first overseas military base in Djibouti. China also signed a US$ 1.1 billion deal on 30 July 2017 with Sri Lanka and acquired a 69.55 per cent stake in the Hambantota Port. It is looking at a stake of up to 85 per cent in Kyauk Pyu, a deep-sea port in the Bay of Bengal in Myanmar. Although Sri Lanka, as per the conditions of the 99-year lease agreement, has ensured that its own navy will be responsible for Hambantota's security, Myanmar may not be able reach the same compromise with China. It is also speculated that China will soon build military bases, similar to one in Djibouti, in Pakistan.
Second, the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) most likely intends to use these facilities as forward naval bases in the future, although such developments are currently held back by technical challenges. China’s defence spending - up to US$ 152 billion in the 2017 defence budget - has seen a 7 per cent increase. Much of the money is expected to go towards the development of the navy. Chinese naval experts such as Yin Zhuo, a PLAN rear admiral, have repeatedly indicated that PLAN needs at least 5 or 6 aircraft-carriers to fulfill its maritime ambitions - this would require even more funding. On 13 March 2017, a South China Morning Post news report cited military insiders and experts saying that China plans to increase the size of its marine corps from about 20,000 to 100,000 personnel, who will be called on to protect the country’s maritime lifelines and its growing interests overseas.
Current Status
Security concerns in the IOR are principally governed by the presence of the US, France and India, without any major conflict of interest. China is increasing its presence with an eye on cultivating strategic interests in the region but unlike the South China Sea (SCS) and East China Sea (ECS), which feature in its core objective dynamics, the IOR is not yet a priority. However, this could soon change. China views economic growth an essential attribute of its great power status, and the Sea Lanes Of Communications (SLOC) present in the IOR are considered crucial for its energy imports and mercantile trade. Hence, as it grows economically, it stands to reason that the IOR will begin to feature prominently in its core objectives.
The IOR features in China’s ‘far seas’ ambitions, dictated by the belief that China must be able to protect its vital SLOCs and many other political and economic overseas interests, including Chinese citizens deployed abroad. However, it is clear that China wants to become a maritime power to not only secure its economic and security interests, but also to gain strategic capital through a strong naval presence in strategically important waters. It is important to remember that the economic growth of other East Asian and Southeast Asian countries is similarly dependent upon the IOR, and China is in conflict with most of these countries on one or the other issue.
Today, China has world-class merchant marine and fishing fleets, a globally recognised shipbuilding capacity, a large and effective coast guard, and an ability to harvest or extract economically important maritime resources. However, due to the long-term imposition of the US/EU arms embargo, absence of domestic expertise for manufacturing advanced naval equipment, and Russia’s incompetence in developing and exporting advanced naval technologies especially in the fields of gas turbine propulsion and naval electronics, China lacks power projection capabilities in the ‘far seas’.
Building ports in important locations of the IOR appears to be working in cash-rich China’s favour. However, PLAN’s intentions to use these facilities as forward naval bases in the future faces challenges, and there have been almost no concrete achievements so far. Hence, for China to become an active member in the current maritime security architecture in the IOR, it must seek to earn the goodwill of the US, France, and India. The best way to do this is to stop confronting or attempting to 'bully' India and the US and its regional allies in the areas of its larger influence, i.e. SCS and ECS.

5 Sept 2017

United Nations/Italy Long-term Fellowship Program for Developing Countries 2017/2018

Application Deadline: 27th September 2017 11:59 a.m (CEST)
Eligible Countries: Developing countries and countries with economy in transition.
To Be Taken At (Country): Italy
About the Award: The 2 nd Level Specializing Master on Navigation and Related Applications is a joint initiative of Politecnico di Torino and Istituto Superiore Mario Boella (ISMB) with the collaboration of the Istituto Nazionale di Ricerca Metrologica (INRIM) and the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs. The II Level Specializing Master is a post graduate academic program (taken after a Master of Science program) that provides high quality training. It provides students with professional knowledge and skills needed in the navigation sector.
The Master in Navigation and Related Applications (MNA) Programme begins in January 2018 and lasts for 12 months including a period ranging from 3 to 4 months for hands-on pilot project (internship). Lectures will be held in English at Politecnico di Torino premises.
Type: Fellowship, Masters
Eligibility: Applicants should be:
  • nationals of developing countries or countries with economy in transition;
  • duly nominated by their governments;
  • age of candidate should not exceed forty (40) years;
  • should have the academic and professional backgrounds required by the specific fellowship programme (candidates for the MNA programme are required to have completed Master Degree or equivalent (5 years University degree) in Aerospace Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Communication Engineering, Information Technology or related subjects. Other degrees in different technological fields can also be considered by the Master’s Programme Commission; and
  • should be able to make professional use of the experience gained in the Programme.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award: 
  • The United Nations also may provide a number of selected participants with international round trip air ticket between the participant’s international airport of departure and Turin, Italy.
The nominating government/agency will bear the following costs on behalf of the selected participant:
  • All expenses in the home country for preparing the abroad travelling, including passport and visa fees, medical examinations, inoculations, and other miscellaneous items, and domestic travel to and from the international airport of departure, in the home country;
  • Salary and related allowances to which a participant may be entitled in his/her country during the period of the fellowship programme;
  • Life insurance and health insurance for the benefit of the participant for the duration of the fellowship programme study.
Duration of Program: The Master in Navigation and Related Applications (MNA) Programme begins in January 2018 and lasts for 12 months including a period ranging from 3 to 4 months for hands-on pilot project (internship).
How to Apply:  In addition to the application form given below, all applicants are REQUESTED also to fill up the on-line application form of Politecnico di Torino and submit it to the institute. That will help co-organizers to streamline the process of selecting recipients of the fellowship grants. Please use this link in the Program webpage (See link below) to see how to proceed with this on-line application .
Award Providers: United Nations, Politecnico di Torino
Important Notes: Applicants should note that selection of fellowship recipients is made on a very competitive basis, as a large number of applications are generally received for a limited number of available fellowships.

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Esprit Commercial Leadership Program for Young African Graduates 2018

Application Deadline: 6th October 2017.
Eligible Countries: African countries
To Be Taken At (Country): Johannesburg, South Africa; Nigeria; Kenya.
About the Award: The Esprit Programme is GSK’s leading global talent development programme for MBA qualified individuals which nurtures a pipeline of diverse leaders, with the right capabilities and behaviours to drive GSK’s future strategic challenges. You’ll bring with you a wealth of knowledge and will recognise that there’s still plenty for you to learn and experience in order for you, to become an extraordinary leader.
Esprit Commercial Pharmaceutical programmes overall goal is to support, stretch, develop and deliver leaders of the future. You will nurture your breadth of experience and leadership capabilities through Esprit’s accelerated development programme.
Type: Internship/Jobs
Eligibility: 
Basic qualifications: 
• MBA.
• Experience in commercial area, passionate about sales and marketing.
• Strong interest to develop career in healthcare industry.
• Track record of taking accountability in both team and individual situations.
• Ability to work in multinational environment, across cultures and in matrix environment.
• Evidence of bringing innovative thinking and an ability to act as a change agent.
• Proven accelerated development in career to date.
• Eligibility to live and work in the country for which you are applying. This will be checked during the recruitment process.
• Fluency in your native language and English, both written and spoken.
• Flexibility, adaptability and highly mobile; you must be willing to move and work in any of the countries where GSK operates.
Preferred qualifications: 
Digital Marketing (Knowledge/ experience or User)
Selection Criteria: Are you interested in working in our transparent and innovative Pharmaceutical business and do the following statements resonate with you;
GSK is looking for extraordinary individuals who can apply both academic excellence and commercial intelligence in a dynamic business environment – to recognise and deliver value for GSK.
  • You love what you do and want to work in an innovative, Inspiring, high performing environment which also improve people’s lives
  • You are courageous to achieve results, excited by change, zealous about sales and marketing
  • You enjoy being accountable and you are ready to fast track your progression and take the personal accountability for delivering commitments
  • GSK Values resonate with you and you want to work in an organisation where you can perform with integrity, transparency, treat people with respect and always have our patients first on your mind.
You will be MBA qualified or on your journey towards obtaining your MBA in 2018.
You may have a dynamic and varied career experience within a commercial setting which highlights your already accelerated career to date.
You will have a passion for Sales or/and Marketing with a strong interest to enhance your career further within the Pharmaceutical Industry.
Ideally you will have some experience with digital marketing (Knowledge/ experience or User). You will have demonstrated excellent communication skills and a flexible mindset to forge your career in a global matrix organisation.
A key focus will be to further enrich your impact through leadership, innovation and decision making capabilities.
The Esprit Commercial Pharmaceutical Leadership is truly unique in the breadth of roles and experiences available and covers a variety of commercial touch-points within Sales & Marketing.
If you have an inquisitive mind and would relish the opportunity to flourish in a diverse, transparent and intellectually demanding global leadership programme then Esprit is for you.
Number of Awards: Not specified
Value of Award:  
  • Through stimulating rotations, you will gain exposure to high profile and diverse roles, such as Marketing, Sales, Business Development and Project management.
  • Throughout the programme you will be encourage to broaden your global business perspective, and enrich your existing commercial experience and knowledge.
Duration of Program: 3-4 years
Award Providers: GSK

TÜBİTAK International Fellowships for Graduate Research in Turkey 2017

Application Deadline: 6th October, 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Recognized Universities in Turkey
Eligible Fields of Study: Natural Sciences, Engineering and Technological Sciences, Medical Sciences, Agricultural Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities
About the Award: The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) grants fellowships for international highly qualified PhD students and young post-doctoral researchers to pursue their research in Turkey in the fields above. The program aims to promote Turkey’s scientific and technological collaboration with countries of the prospective researchers. Preference will be given to candidates who demonstrate the potential to contribute significantly to Turkey’s goal of international cooperation in scientific and technological development.
Type: Fellowship
Eligibility: 
  1. Candidates should be non-Turkish citizens. Applicants who hold dual citizenship with Turkey are   not eligible to apply.
  2. Candidates should have an invitation from the universities or research institutes in Turkey.
  3. Candidates should certify that they have sufficient command of language to perform their research.
  4. Candidates must be 35 years old or younger.
  5. Candidates should be enrolled in a program in abroad for PhD students.
  6. Candidates who hold a PhD degree in Turkey should have a GPA minimum of 3.50/4.00 in PhD program.
Selection Criteria: All successfully submitted applications are listed and prepared for scientific evaluation after the prior selection. The proposal will be evaluated according to the following 4 evaluation criteria:
  1. Research potential of the fellow
  2. Scientific and technological quality of the research proposal
  3. Impact of the proposed fellowship to the applicant’s training and career development to  the hosting institution and to Turkey
  4. Implementation of the proposed research
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Fellowship: The scholarship will consist of a monthly stipend, tuition fee, travel costs and health insurance.
Duration of Fellowship: Maximum duration for the fellowship is 12 months.
How to Apply: All applications must be submitted electronically via TÜBİTAK scholarship application portal by 6th October, 2017
It is important to visit the Fellowshsip webpage (see link below) to access the online application form and for detailed information on how to apply for this scholarship.
Award Provider: Turkey Government

Echoes of Reagan: Another Nuclear Buildup

Mel Gurtov

Thirty years ago Americans endured an absurd expansion of the US nuclear-weapon force under President Reagan.  The announced weapons modernization program was accompanied by a huge increase in the military budget, the President’s warning to the Soviet Union that he was willing to spend it into oblivion, and crazy talk from some of his advisers about the potential to fight and win a nuclear war.  So here we are evidently back to the future as the Trump administration forges ahead with nuclear “modernization,” without a set strategy for the weapons but with billions of dollars to burn.
The Nuclear Lobby
Right now, the US has about 6,800 total nuclear weapons—roughly 1,400 strategic weapons deployed in ground-, air-, and sea-based missiles, and the rest stockpiled or retired. (The Russians’ arsenal is approximately the same in total.)  From any rational point of view, these weapons are far more than are necessary to deter an adversary.  Submarine-launched ballistic missiles alone—920 of which are fixed on 230 invulnerable submarines, each missile having destructive power equivalent to many Hiroshimas—are sufficient to destroy an entire country and bring on nuclear winter.  There simply is no legitimate basis for believing that the nuclear arsenal needs to be larger, more invulnerable, or more accurate and reliable.
Yet as Americans learned long ago, for the nuclear lobby—the pro-nuclear members of Congress, the military industries that test and produce the weapons and the means of their delivery, and the various Pentagon advisory boards, laboratories, and nuclear planners—enough is never enough.  These folks can always be counted on to argue that the nuclear stockpile must be periodically revitalized to ensure readiness.  And all it takes is a supposed nuclear threat—today meaning North Korea—to bolster the nuclear lobby’s case for upgrading.
The arguments against further investment in nuclear weapons are just as compelling now as they were years ago.  As the US invests more in them, so will the Russians and the Chinese, reviving a nuclear arms race.  Continued reliance on nukes supports pro-nuclear thinking in Pakistan, India, Israel, North Korea, and elsewhere, contributing to the potential for war by accident or design.  These weapons, moreover, which have no purpose other than to deter their use by others, can be inherently destabilizing—as is the case now with a new Cruise missile (price tag: $25 billion), whose accuracy and stealth raise the possibility of a disastrous miscalculation by adversaries.  At the same time, such a weapon should, but won’t, eliminate the need for ground-based ICBMs.  No, say the weapons proponents: the ground-air-sea nuclear triad will remain, adding billions to the military budget.
The nuclear weapons lobby is surely delighted with Trump’s decision. The lobby was downcast when it seemed that President Obama was headed toward bringing nuclear weapons numbers down to some minimum figure.  But he reversed course late in his second administration and agreed to new investments in them, apparently in order to ensure Senate approval of the “New Start” agreement with Russia in 2010.  Now, the weapons manufacturers that will be responsible for Trump’s program—Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman—are assured of many more years of multibillion dollar activity.
Present Choices
When we think about national security in the human interest, two considerations are uppermost: the quality of life for our people and a peaceful future for the planet.  As to the first, we might evaluate the cost of another nuclear-weapon modernization when matched against the urgent need to start thinking about paying for rebuilding Houston after Hurricane Harvey.  The Washington Post reports (August 28) that “Hurricane Katrina, in 2005, caused $160 billion in damage and Hurricane Sandy in 2012 caused around $70 billion in damage, according to inflation-adjusted figures provided by the federal government.” “Harvey” may well cost more—even more than the full cost of Trump’s nuclear modernization program, which will easily top $125 billion. FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency) reportedly has only $3.8 billion on hand; the rest of the rescue money must come from elsewhere in the federal budget. But, Texans and Louisianans, don’t count on Trump to divert a dime from the military to bail you out.  (Come to think of it, abandoning the Mexico wall project would also be a welcome response to Houston’s calamity.)
The other consideration is global security while nuclear weapons are under the command of Donald Trump.  In the May-June 2017 issue of Foreign Affairs, Philip Gordon offers three crisis scenarios—with China, Iran, and North Korea—that Trump might well mishandle and involve the US in war.  Each potential crisis might lead a president known for recklessness, unpreparedness, and predilection for making threats to consider use of nuclear weapons. So the issue here is squarely about national security for us and for all.

Dancing With the Devil

Miguel A. Cruz-Díaz

Dystopia is finally here, but we seem to have our sides mixed up as of late.
We live in a time when Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation move forward with labeling anti-fascists groups as domestic terrorist organizations while removing white supremacists groups from those very same lists. The militarization of police has resumed, while the United States continues to wage its imperial wars across the planet regardless of the fact that climate change has begun to ravage our world. Every conceivable method of shoring up the police state that began to take definitive shape under the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama is once again being implemented.
But what do “progressive” and liberal news sites harp on about? It’s all about Russia, sheet cake, Melania Trump’s post-hurricane footwear, and the threat of a shadowy villainous phantom that has been set loose on an unsuspecting humanity. But that evil is not the growing threat of a resurgent far right. Oh, no. To them, that evil is its exact opposite: a collection of disparate groups collectively known as “antifa”.
And just what is antifa? To many it is nothing but a motley collection of violent thugs that destroy private property and assault poor white men with Confederate battle flags and trendy swastikas, robbing them of their precious right to free speech. Poor devils! In actuality there is no such thing as one organization called antifa. It is, in reality, a catchall term for a number of far-left, generally anti-capitalist groups, generally anti-capitalists, that actively oppose the rebirth of fascism. They are by definition anti-homophobic, anti-racist, and anti-sexist. In other words, they are the exact opposite of Nazis. To be antifa is to act against fascism, not to believe in anything specific other than the protection of others who may be targeted by bigots, by any means necessary. For a much better description the recently published book by Mark Bray, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, serves as an excellent primer and essential reading.
At this point, dear reader, you might find yourself asking how, if they are the exact opposite of Nazis, could the antifa be comparable “in every way” to Nazis (as some misfortunate souls like Chris Hedges, The New York TimesThe Washington Postand even The Guardian, continue to vomit on every conceivable media outlet out there). The answer lies in the necessity of liberalism to create false equivalencies in order to maintain the status quo. In other words the often-parroted claim that antifa and Nazism are morally equitable is, quite simply, complete bullshit.
Radical leftists are often accused of being utopian in their thinking, but at this point it has become quite evident that it is liberals who are living in complete fantasy while leftists are the consummate realists. When anarchists, communists, and other anti-capitalists say that it is impossible to negotiate with fascists it is because they have the weight of history and experience behind their arguments. Meanwhile it should be apparent that liberal attacks against antifa are simply reflecting a socio-political strategy of deflection in order to ensure the survival of their class and racial privilege.
Collaboration by Western governments with fascist and totalitarian regimes is nothing new, of course. Nor is the branding of groups actively engaged in conflict with those regimes as “terrorists” a new development either. We’ve all seen it before. Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Pinochet’s Chile… the list goes on and on. And Western governments like it that way. Capitalism likes it that way. Markets remain stabilized, foreign investment secured, social justice movements squashed.
At the end of the day the call to resist “violence” is all about political theater. Conservatives play along with fascists due to their cultish obsession with law and order and their simmering white supremacist tendencies. Liberals, while also indulging in white supremacy, attack anti-fascist groups because they can recognize a good sacrificial lamb when they see one. By doing that they hope they can distract the wolves from chomping down on their own neck. The center and the center-right, mostly proud capitalist Democrats and other “progressive” Wall Street darlings would rather see leftists beaten and killed before they themselves become the targets. Actions like these simply echo the late Nikos Poulantzas’s critique of fascism, where he stated that the Third Reich wouldn’t have survived without liberal support. At the end of the day they’ll simply obey orders and be good, law-abiding citizens. Just like their liberal fellows in the Reich proved to be.
Liberals refuse to abandon their capitalist white privilege, and would rather see blood spilled in order to maintain their idiotic concept of “centrism” before even thinking about considering any kind of support for anti-capitalist anti-fascists. It is purely an attempt at damage control, their way of making sure that violence stays where it belongs: centered against African-Americans, Muslims, Gays, and Latinos.
The liberal obsession with championing military intervention abroad and attacking active resistance to fascism at home by criminalizing anything that is even remotely associated to their imaginary concept of a shadowy antifa organization, regardless of the fact that such a thing does not exist, only serves to underscore the fact that their obsession with “non-violence” is purely a self-serving lie.
This, then, is the real motivation behind the major push by the mainstream liberal media towards criminalizing the very idea of antifa, and why liberals have insisted on non-scandals like Russia. It goes beyond the concept of news fabrication. Like all good propaganda, it is the constant flooding of all media with a single message, nonstop. And it is the blandest kind of appeasement. It must be said that liberals labeling antifa as the equivalent of Nazis seems to be as suicidal an action as insisting on an alternative treatment to a deadly tumor that involves the patient “playing nice” to the malignant growth, all the while opposing chemotherapy and surgery as measures “too extreme” to even be considered.
I can see the Saturday Night Live sketch now: “Your tumor needs a hug. And some sheet cake.” Queue the canned laughter and the outro music.
Centrists like Trevor Noah and white liberals like Tina Fey and Samantha Bee speak from class privilege and would rather have the rest of us stressing the need to learn to coexist with the closest thing to real evil that our species has ever produced instead. Watching someone like Noah, a South African man who should know all too well what the horrors of white supremacy entail, ridiculing a “vegan antifa” on cable television (and therefore championing the silencing of dissent) is all the evidence needed to denounce the tragic consequences of following this sort of terminal liberalism to its logical and horrific conclusion. Even someone as knowledgeable as Noam Chomsky seems to have completely lost the plot when it comes to anti-fascism.
Make no mistake about this. Fascism is a tumor. You don’t negotiate or appease a tumor. You cut the fucking thing out, and in this case antifa is one of society’s scalpels.  So keep that in mind whenever you, dear reader, choose to repeat some nonsense that your favorite talking head spewed out late at night. Words have consequences, now more than ever.

Australian Catholic University (ACU) International Masters and PhD Scholarships 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 30th September, 2017
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: International
To be taken at (country): Australia
About the Award: Up to 20 scholarships will be available to students and each scholarship will last for the duration of the recipients course, subject to satisfactory academic performance. The scholarship rewards students based on academic merit. For this reason, you must have achieved at least an average result of 80% in prior studies for your application to be considered. This average can only be calculated from study done in the past two years
Up to two Higher Degree by Research scholarships equivalent to the fees and stipend for recipients enrolling in a Masters by Research or Doctoral course of study will also be offered.
Type: Masters by Research, Doctoral
Eligibility: 
  • This scholarship is open to commencing International postgraduate and undergraduate students with outstanding academic merit of at least an average result of 80% in prior studies.
  • Candidates must not be an Australian permanent resident citizen or New Zealand citizen;
  • Candidates must have an offer for a place in an undergraduate, postgraduate or PhD program at ACU;
  • Candidates must attend the relevant ACU campus as a full-time student;
  • Candidates must not be receiving any other major scholarship or award ;
  • Candidates must not be attending ACU as a Study Abroad or Exchange student
  • Students must maintain satisfactory academic progress for their duration of their course. Successful applicants must also agree to act as student ambassadors for ACU and support promotional activities.
Selection Criteria:  Applications are assessed based on the strength of the following criteria:
  • Academic merit
Selection Process: The recipients will be selected by a Selection Committee consisting of the Executive Director, International, the Executive Dean of each Faculty (or nominee), the Dean of Graduate Studies, the Associate Director, International Admissions and Student Relations and the Associate Director, International Marketing and Recruitment. Further, the Selection Committee may give consideration to:
  1. The diversity of the source countries of applicants and the courses in which they are enrolled (including across a spread of undergraduate and postgraduate coursework and research programs and campuses);
  2. In the case of applicants undertaking research degrees, the alignment of the applicant’s intended research with the research strengths of the University.
Number of Awardees: Up to 20
Value of Scholarship: 50% tuition waiver
How to Apply: Apply online by clicking the button below and completing the application form. You must attach the following documentation with your application:
  • Evidence of academic  merit, showing achievement of an average of at least 80% across the  applicant’s most recent study.
Award Provider:  The Australian Catholic University

Macron’s labor decrees in France: A new stage in the international social counter-revolution

Alex Lantier

Last week, the government of French President Emanuel Macron detailed its plans to rewrite the country’s labor code, aiming to remove all legal barriers for business to lay off workers, lengthen working hours, and slash wages and benefits.
Macron is setting into motion a historic confrontation with the working class with explosive global consequences. His poll ratings have plummeted near 30 percent just four months after his election, and his policies face deep opposition among workers and youth.
As the US ruling elite slashes health care, public education and other key social programs, and as the European Union negotiates another raft of austerity measures with Greece’s Syriza (“Coalition of the Radical Left”) government, the ruling class internationally sees France as a critical test case. It remembers that the eruption of France’s May-June 1968 general strike sparked revolutionary struggles worldwide. Amidst the deepest crisis of capitalism since the Great Depression of the 1930s, the ruling elite is determined to strangle mass opposition to Macron’s agenda.
In an editorial titled “The Real Battle Begins: Mr Macron vs the Labor Code,” the New York Times demanded that the 107-year-old law be scrapped, denouncing the “notion of the worker in permanent need of protection against rapacious capitalists.”
It bemoaned the fact that in France, “Every effort at fundamental reform for at least a quarter of a century has foundered on giant and sometimes violent union demonstrations. … Mr. Macron and his government have set off on the right track with the labor reform, and they must stay the course.”
In its article “It really feels like we are on the eve of a major struggle,” Germany’s Die Welt worried, “No one knows who will win,” and told Macron to stake everything on a decisive blow. Macron, it wrote, “now has a historic chance. He will not have a second one.”
The working class faces in the Macron administration a conscious and ruthless enemy, dedicated to the destruction of its basic social and democratic rights. The only way for workers to defend these rights is to oppose this government and seek its removal. As initial protests are called against the decrees, however, workers need a clear understanding of the revolutionary implications of a struggle against Macron and the need for a new, international strategy and political leadership.
Macron, a former investment banker, is proceeding with undisguised contempt for the population. His decrees simply re-introduce the measures which the previous Socialist Party (PS) government of President François Hollande withdrew from its wildly unpopular labor law last year, in the face of mass protests. These include introducing new labor contracts with no job security, limiting penalties for unfair dismissal, and letting employers and trade unions negotiate contracts at the individual firm level that violate the Labor Code.
Macron is relying on the complicity and bankruptcy of the trade unions and their political allies. The unions called off last year’s protests, amid a massive police crackdown and PS threats to ban protests under France’s state of emergency, based on worthless promises that the PS would not enforce these measures.
Macron, who was elected with PS backing, after the PS collapsed in this year’s elections, is ruthlessly imposing the program of the EU and the capitalist class. The dominant factions of the French financial aristocracy have responded to Trump’s election with plans for an aggressive military alliance with Berlin, to be funded by repudiating the social rights won by the working class in Europe in the 20th century. While the super-rich are to be showered with money, workers are to be hurled back decades.
Only a few days before announcing his anti-worker decrees, Macron gave a speech declaring that the absence of a major war in Europe in the last 70 years was an “aberration,” calling for a major build up of the army: “The threat is at our gates, and war is on our continent.”
The French Labor Code, passed in 1910 in response to the wave of strikes across Europe provoked by the Russian Revolution of 1905, is only the first target of the militarist offensive. All the social concessions made to the European working class in the 20th century, based above all on the October 1917 revolution and the existence of the Soviet Union, are targeted for destruction. Macron’s ministers are announcing plans to slash health care, pensions and education, while spending billions on defense budget increases and cuts to the Tax On Wealth (ISF).
The claim that there is no money for workers’ basic social needs, nearly a decade after the bourgeoisie began pumping trillions of euros into the banks in response to the 2008 Wall Street crash, is a contemptible lie. But as last year’s struggle against the PS labor law showed, a defense of basic social rights will rapidly escalate into a confrontation with the government. Workers in France face not a trade union but a political fight, which can be waged only in a common revolutionary struggle with their class brothers and sisters across Europe and internationally.
Workers seeking to fight the labor decrees will be compelled to oppose imperialist war and the lies of the “war on terror.” The wars in Libya and Syria, which spawned terror attacks in Europe by Islamist networks the NATO powers backed as proxies in the Middle East, are classical examples of the anti-democratic implications of imperialist war. The PS responded to the terrorist attacks not by cutting off support to Islamist forces in the Middle East, but by declaring a state of emergency suspending basic democratic rights and giving police draconian powers to prosecute youth and workers engaged in constitutionally-protected protests.
The fight against Macron’s austerity measures requires building a new political leadership and new organs of working class struggle, and a struggle against the trade union bureaucracies and petty bourgeois political forces like Jean-Luc Mélenchon or the New Anti-capitalist Party (NPA). While they are calling a series of token protests, these organizations can only produce disasters for the working class.
Mélenchon and the NPA, which for decades worked on the periphery of the PS, advance a nationalist agenda to derail opposition among workers to the decrees. Mélenchon is backing factions of the ruling class hostile to Macron’s alliance with Germany—like General Pierre de Villiers, whose sudden resignation shook the Macron administration—and issuing impotent and cynical appeals to police not to repress protests. Just like the NPA, which calls for a closer alliance between Mélenchon’s forces and the unions, Mélenchon is hostile to unifying the struggles of workers in France and internationally against austerity and war.
Workers need new organs of struggle to replace the corrupt trade union bureaucracies like the Stalinist General Confederation of Labor (CGT), which is calling protests after negotiating the decrees with Macron. The decrees officially grant the unions broad powers to implement cuts in workplaces, and Macron is promoting the so-called “trade union check” to funnel more corporate money into trade union coffers because the trade union bureaucracies are trusted tools of big business.
The objective rise of social opposition in the working class must be developed as a conscious political movement. Opposition to the EU’s drive to dictatorship, war and social counter-revolution must be discussed at workplaces, schools, and working-class communities in France and across Europe. This will lay the basis for the development of a broad network of popular workplace and neighborhood committees, independent of the trade unions, in which workers can discuss and advance anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist and socialist demands that correspond to the needs of the masses.
Above all, we urge workers to join and build the Parti de l’égalité socialiste(PES), the French section of the International Committee of the Fourth International, and its sister sections across Europe and internationally.
The PES is building a political leadership of the working class in France. Its task is to connect the growing opposition of the working class to a socialist and internationalist movement that can take state power in France and across Europe, and reorganize economic life on the basis of social need, through the construction of the United Socialist States of Europe.

Israeli electricity shutoff deepens social crisis in Gaza

Jean Shaoul

Palestinians in Gaza have suffered a catastrophic decline in living conditions, largely ignored by the world’s media, because of Israel’s drastic cut in June of the territory’s already precarious supply of electricity.
The 2 million Palestinians living in Gaza are now able to access electricity for as little as two hours a day, and this during the sweltering heat and humidity of an East Mediterranean summer.
Last week, United Nations General Secretary Antonio Guterres, speaking after a three day visit to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, described it as “one of the most dramatic humanitarian crises” he had ever seen. He called for the opening of Gaza’s borders with Israel and Egypt.
Guterres made no mention of Israel’s responsibility for the current disaster. However, the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem has been more forthright, saying Israel has condemned the people of Gaza to live “in abject poverty under practically inhuman conditions unparalleled in the modern world.”
B’Tselem declared that failure to provide power to the Gazan population is “primarily a direct result of official Israeli policy.” It describes how Israel “prevents the repair and restoration of [Gaza’s only] power station it bombed in 2006, keeping it from operating at full capacity.” It added that Israel “compels Gaza residents to purchase Israeli fuel exclusively, and to do so for the same price paid inside Israel,” despite immense disparities between the two economies, and “delays or prevents repairs to the power grid and imposes restrictions on bringing spare parts into Gaza.”
Gaza relies almost entirely on Israel for its electricity supply—either directly via power lines or through the supply of diesel to runs its power station. A small amount of electricity comes from Egypt. The Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority (PA) under President Mahmoud Abbas, not Hamas-ruled Gaza, is responsible for paying for the supplies.
The already terrible situation was exacerbated in April, when the PA, in an attempt to pressure Hamas into relinquishing its control of Gaza and “reconciling” with the PA, suspended electricity payments to Israel. It also reinstated unaffordable taxes on diesel destined for Gaza, which had been suspended following mass protests in January, forcing the power plant to shut down.
By May, the International Committee of the Red Cross was already warning that Gaza was on the brink of “systemic collapse” as operating surgeries, as well as water and sanitation systems, ceased to function.
On June 19, Israel cut its electricity supply via its power lines to Gaza by more than half, ostensibly at the request of the PA, which is itself desperately short of cash.
These measures, on top of PA cuts to civil servants’ salaries and funding for hospitals and clinics in Gaza, have only served to increase the hostility of the Palestinian people towards Abbas. By nakedly siding with Israel against Hamas at the expense of the Palestinians in Gaza, Abbas has lost all semblance of political legitimacy. At the same time, the PA’s security apparatus is widely hated for its increasingly draconian actions, including the shutting down of 11 web sites with alleged links to Hamas or multimillionaire Muhammad Dahlan, a longstanding rival to Abbas.
The combined measures of Israel and Abbas have reduced Gaza to 19th century conditions. With only a couple of hours of water being supplied a day due to power cuts, people are forced to store it or buy water from private suppliers at 25 times the normal price.
Without electricity, sewage, water treatment and desalination plants are unable to function effectively. Much of the coastline is now heavily contaminated. The pollution claimed its first victim last July, when a five-year-old boy died after swimming in the sea.
Access to basic health care services, including sterilisation and cleaning, have become almost inaccessible, leading to soaring rates of infection. Diagnostic services have been curtailed and sensitive equipment such as MRI machines have been damaged.
Medical supplies have become scarce, with the Ministry of Health reporting it had less than a month’s supply of essential medicines, including cancer and cystic fibrosis drugs, and medical disposables.
While the UN forecast in 2012 that Gaza would become “unliveable” by 2020, another report published in July stated that the deterioration had accelerated “further and faster” than anticipated. It drew attention to Israel’s refusal to allow construction material and equipment into Gaza to complete the necessary reconstruction, after Israel’s massive bombardment of Gaza’s basic infrastructure and housing in 2014.
Even before this latest crisis, the situation was dire. According to a recent report by the European Union-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, more than 65 percent of Gazans live in poverty, 72 percent are food-insecure, and 80 percent are dependent on international aid, while unemployment reached 43 percent at the end of 2016.
This catastrophic situation flows inexorably from the deliberate and criminal actions on the part of Israel, which as the occupying power is fully responsible under international law for the welfare of Gaza’s population. This flagrant breach of international law is passed over in silence by the imperialist powers, the US and the European Union. Not only is this an implicit endorsement of Israel’s ever tightening blockade of Gaza but an advance warning that they too will carry out similar measures against their enemies.
If Abbas retained any lingering hopes that his subservience to Washington, Israel’s paymaster, would bring about either talks on a Palestinian statelet or an end to further Israeli settlements, the recent visit to the Middle East of US President Donald Trump’s adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner should have put paid to such fantasies. Kushner was reported to have said in off-the-record comments that there may not be a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Last week, Trump’s ambassador to Israel, David Friedman—a long-time supporter of Zionist settlements in the West Bank—referred to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories as only “an alleged occupation.”
Israel has been aided and abetted by the regional elites, which have refused to lift a finger to defend the Palestinians in Gaza against Israel’s murderous assaults in 2008-2009, 2012 and 2014, and in the ongoing blockade. Egypt too has largely kept its border with Gaza closed, particularly following the seizure of power in 2013 by General Abdul Fattah el-Sissi, who viewed Hamas as an offshoot of the now-banned Muslim Brotherhood.
Nevertheless, in a marked policy shift, Hamas has now managed to secure some fuel supplies from el-Sissi’s military junta as it makes a desperate attempt to break the ever-tightening siege imposed by Israel and Abbas.
Hamas has also apparently reconciled itself with Dahlan, a former Fatah member widely viewed as an Israeli agent, who fought a civil war with Hamas in 2006. Dahlan was expelled from Fatah by Abbas in 2011, alleging his involvement in corruption and the murder of PLO chairman Yassir Arafat. Israel’s preferred candidate to succeed the 82-year old Abbas, he is close to both the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where he lives in self-imposed exiled, and Egypt, which brokered the rapprochement.
Earlier this year, Hamas agreed a new charter, stressing its role as a national liberation movement, omitting any mention of the Muslim Brotherhood and effectively repudiating its links with the organisation. Hamas’s officials also left Qatar last June, after the Saudi-led alliance imposed its embargo on the country, accusing it of supporting terrorism.
There have been indications that Egypt may reopen Gaza’s Rafah crossing into the Sinai Peninsula, where Egypt has been fighting Islamic State, if Dahlan’s men oversee the crossing and create a security buffer zone.
There are also pledges from the UAE to fund humanitarian projects in Gaza worth $15 million a month. The UAE now seems set to take over Qatar’s role as Hamas’s patron, in return for Gaza’s acceptance of some leadership role for Dahlan.